AMD EPYC 7713P vs AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data draws a starkly one-sided picture in raw compute performance. The AMD EPYC 7713P wins all six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, with every victory landing between 460.9% and 462.3% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS. These are not marginal leads; they are generational and scale-based gaps. The EPYC 7713P dominates in every measured multi-core workload, which is expected given its 64 cores and 128 threads versus the Ryzen 5's 6 cores and 12 threads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 69,229 against the Ryzen's 12,342, a 460.9% advantage. The single-core results are equally lopsided, with the EPYC scoring 9,773 versus 1,742 in Cinebench R23 single-core, a 461% lead. This suggests that even in lightly threaded tasks, the server chip's architecture and higher sustained power envelope translate into substantially higher throughput per thread in these specific benchmarks.

However, the Ryzen 5 7533HS is not without its own domain of strength, though it does not manifest in the Cinebench suite. The database includes PassMark tests for the Ryzen 5 only, covering workloads like data compression (168,692), data encryption (10,718), extended instructions (11,219), floating point math (27,800), integer math (50,800), multithread (14,520), physics (821), random string sorting (17,669), and single thread (2,740). These scores are not directly comparable to the EPYC's Cinebench results, but they demonstrate that the mobile chip is a competent all-rounder for everyday and moderately demanding tasks. The EPYC 7713P has no PassMark entries, so the database cannot directly compare those specific workloads. The use-case split is therefore clear: the EPYC 7713P is built for server and workstation workloads where core count and sustained multi-threaded performance are paramount, while the Ryzen 5 7533HS targets mobile systems where power efficiency, integrated graphics, and adequate single-thread performance matter more. The Ryzen 5's 35W TDP and integrated Radeon 660M graphics position it for laptops, not rack-mounted compute nodes.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different generations and process nodes, which explains part of the performance gap. The EPYC 7713P uses Zen 3 architecture on a 7 nm TSMC process, codenamed Milan, and belongs to the EPYC 7003 series. The Ryzen 5 7533HS uses Zen 3+ architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process, codenamed Rembrandt-R, and belongs to the Ryzen 7000 series. The EPYC's die is composed of 8 chiplets, each 81 mm², totaling 33,200 million transistors. The Ryzen 5 uses a monolithic 208 mm² die, though the transistor count is not recorded in the database. The node shrink from 7 nm to 6 nm gives the Ryzen 5 a density advantage per area, but the EPYC compensates with sheer scale.

Cache hierarchies differ dramatically. Both chips share the same per-core L1 (64 KB) and L2 (512 KB) sizes, but L3 is where they diverge: the EPYC 7713P has 256 MB of shared L3, while the Ryzen 5 7533HS has only 16 MB. That 16x difference in L3 capacity is a major factor in the EPYC's multi-threaded dominance, as it allows far more data to reside on-die for large server workloads. Memory support also splits along architectural lines: the EPYC uses DDR4 with an eight-channel memory bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ryzen 5 uses DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. The EPYC also supports ECC memory, the Ryzen 5 does not. PCIe lanes differ as well: the EPYC offers Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only), the Ryzen 5 offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The EPYC has no integrated graphics; the Ryzen 5 has Radeon 660M. Sockets are incompatible: the EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3, the Ryzen 5 uses AMD Socket FP7. The EPYC's TDP is 225W versus the Ryzen 5's 35W, reflecting the server part's need for substantial cooling and power delivery.

The release dates are also far apart. The EPYC 7713P launched on March 14, 2021, while the Ryzen 5 7533HS launched on August 31, 2024. The EPYC's launch MSRP is $5010, a figure the database records; the Ryzen 5 has no recorded launch MSRP. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier. The architectural takeaway is that these are entirely different product classes sharing a common vendor and similar per-core cache topology, but diverging on node, die layout, memory controller, and power envelope.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion: choose the AMD EPYC 7713P if your workload is defined by massive parallelism, large shared caches, and memory bandwidth, such as virtualization, database serving, or heavy multi-threaded compilation. It wins every Cinebench benchmark by a factor of roughly 5.6x, and its 256 MB L3 and eight-channel DDR4 support are tailored for server environments. The percentile ranking versus all CPUs is 74 for the EPYC and 73 for the Ryzen 5, meaning both sit near the same overall percentile despite the massive Cinebench gap, which suggests the Ryzen 5's PassMark results bolster its standing in mixed workloads. The EPYC's average benchmark score is 20,024, while the Ryzen 5's is 19,364, a difference of only 3.4%. That surprising closeness in average score, despite the Cinebench blowout, indicates the Ryzen 5 excels in the PassMark categories that are not measured for the EPYC.

Choose the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS for mobile or power-constrained systems. Its 35W TDP, integrated Radeon 660M graphics, and DDR5 dual-channel support make it suitable for laptops where battery life and physical space are limiting factors. It loses every Cinebench comparison by a wide margin, but the database does not record any Cinebench-style server workloads for it, so the comparison is inherently skewed toward the EPYC's strengths. The Ryzen 5's nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V (0% delta), Intel Core i5-1345U (-0.2%), Intel Core i7-8700K (0.7%), and Intel Core i7-10700F (-0.7%), placing it in a competitive mobile and older desktop range. The EPYC's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-11800H (0.1%), AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX (0.5%), Intel Core i7-11600H (0.5%), and AMD Ryzen 3 30 (-0.6%), which are mostly high-end desktop and workstation parts. The verdict is not about which is "better" in absolute terms, but which fits the intended deployment: the EPYC for a datacenter rack, the Ryzen 5 for a laptop chassis.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7713P has 64 cores and 128 threads. The AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: How much larger is the L3 cache on the EPYC 7713P?

A: The EPYC 7713P has 256 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Ryzen 5 7533HS has 16 MB of shared L3 cache, a 16x difference.

Q: Does the Ryzen 5 7533HS have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes Radeon 660M integrated graphics. The EPYC 7713P has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The EPYC 7713P supports eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Ryzen 5 7533HS supports dual-channel DDR5 with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which chip supports ECC memory?

A: The EPYC 7713P supports ECC memory. The Ryzen 5 7533HS does not.

Q: What are the release dates for both processors?

A: The EPYC 7713P was released on March 14, 2021. The Ryzen 5 7533HS was released on August 31, 2024.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head Cinebench results show a consistent and overwhelming pattern. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7713P scores 6,978 against the Ryzen 5's 1,243, a 461.4% advantage. In R15 single-core, the EPYC scores 984 versus 175, a 462.3% lead, the largest margin in the entire comparison. R20 multi-core shows 29,076 versus 5,183, a 461% gap. R20 single-core shows 4,104 versus 731, a 461.4% lead. R23 multi-core shows 69,229 versus 12,342, a 460.9% gap. R23 single-core shows 9,773 versus 1,742, a 461% lead. Every single benchmark lands within a narrow band of 460.9% to 462.3%, indicating that the relative performance difference is remarkably consistent across both single-threaded and multi-threaded Cinebench versions. That consistency suggests the EPYC's advantage is not workload-dependent within this suite; it stems from a fundamental per-thread execution advantage combined with a 10.7x core count lead.

The Ryzen 5 7533HS does have its own benchmark set that the EPYC lacks, but those PassMark results are not part of the head-to-head table. The database records winsA as 6 and winsB as 0, meaning the EPYC sweeps the comparison entirely. For context, the EPYC's average benchmark score is 20,024, and its nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-11800H, scores 19,998 (0.1% delta). The Ryzen 5's average is 19,364, with its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V, scoring 19,368 (0% delta). The percentile rankings are 74 for the EPYC and 73 for the Ryzen 5, so both sit near the same overall standing relative to all CPUs in the database. This is a curious result: the EPYC blows the Ryzen 5 away in every Cinebench test, yet their average scores and percentiles are nearly identical. The explanation lies in the different benchmark suites recorded for each chip; the Ryzen 5's PassMark results, such as data compression at 168,692 and integer math at 50,800, contribute to its average in ways the EPYC's Cinebench-only data cannot match.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification category. The EPYC 7713P has 64 cores and 128 threads, while the Ryzen 5 7533HS has 6 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 2000.00 MHz for the EPYC and 3.30 GHz for the Ryzen 5; boost clocks are 3.68 GHz and 4.40 GHz respectively. TDP is 225W versus 35W. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3, the Ryzen 5 uses AMD Socket FP7. Architecture is Zen 3 versus Zen 3+. Codename is Milan versus Rembrandt-R. Process node is 7 nm versus 6 nm, both from TSMC. The EPYC has 33,200 million transistors and an 8x 81 mm² die size; the Ryzen 5 has no recorded transistor count and a 208 mm² die size. L1 and L2 caches are identical at 64 KB and 512 KB per core, but L3 is 256 MB shared versus 16 MB shared. Memory support is DDR4 versus DDR5, with an eight-channel bus versus dual-channel, and bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s. ECC support is present on the EPYC, absent on the Ryzen 5. PCIe is Gen 4 with 128 lanes versus Gen 4 with 20 lanes. The EPYC has no integrated graphics; the Ryzen 5 has Radeon 660M. Market segment is Server/Workstation versus Mobile. Both are Active production status. Release dates are March 14, 2021 versus August 31, 2024. The EPYC has a launch MSRP of $5010; the Ryzen 5 has none recorded. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. Part numbers are 100-000000337 and 100-000000337WOF for the EPYC, and 100-000001632 (FP7) and 100-000001634 (FP7r2) for the Ryzen 5. These differences define two entirely separate product tiers within AMD's lineup.