AMD EPYC 7742 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7235HS Comparison

The benchmark data presents a stark contrast: the AMD EPYC 7742 wins every head-to-head benchmark listed, often by a margin exceeding 464%. While the Ryzen 5 7235HS holds its own in the overall percentile ranking, the EPYC 7742 is in an entirely different performance class, dominating multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads alike in these specific Cinebench tests. The data shows a 64-core server processor utterly outclassing a 4-core mobile chip in raw compute throughput.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The EPYC 7742’s victory is total and consistent across all six Cinebench comparisons. In the Cinebench R23 multicore test, the EPYC 7742 scores 58,769 against the Ryzen 5 7235HS’s 10,418, a delta of 464.1%. This is not a marginal lead; it is a performance gap of more than fivefold. The pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the EPYC 7742’s 24,682 dwarfs the Ryzen’s 4,375, again a 464.2% advantage. Even in the less demanding Cinebench R15 multicore test, the EPYC 7742’s 5,923 score is 464.1% higher than the Ryzen’s 1,050.

The single-core results are even more revealing. Typically, a newer, higher-clocked mobile chip would be expected to win single-thread tests. However, the data shows the opposite. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC 7742 scores 8,296 versus the Ryzen 5 7235HS’s 1,470, a 464.4% lead. The same trend holds in Cinebench R20 single-core (3,484 vs 617, a 464.7% delta) and Cinebench R15 single-core (836 vs 148, a 464.9% delta). The EPYC 7742’s single-core advantage is proportionally larger than its multi-core lead. This suggests that despite the Ryzen’s higher boost clock of 4.20 GHz compared to the EPYC’s 3.40 GHz, the EPYC’s architecture and memory subsystem deliver superior performance in these specific tests. The data is unambiguous: the EPYC 7742 wins all 6 head-to-head benchmarks, leaving the Ryzen 5 7235HS with zero wins.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the provided benchmark data, the AMD EPYC 7742 is the winner in every measured category. Its strengths lie in sheer throughput, as evidenced by its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 58,769. This makes it the clear choice for workloads that scale with core count, such as rendering, scientific computing, or virtualized server environments. The 64 cores and 128 threads provide a massive parallel processing capability that the 4-core, 8-thread Ryzen 5 7235HS cannot match.

The EPYC 7742 also wins in single-core performance in these benchmarks, which is surprising given the Ryzen’s higher clock speeds. The data shows the EPYC 7742 achieving 8,296 in Cinebench R23 single-core, a 464.4% improvement over the Ryzen’s 1,470. This indicates that the EPYC’s Zen 2 architecture, despite being an older generation than the Ryzen’s Zen 3+, is more efficient in this workload. Consequently, the EPYC 7742 is not just for multi-threaded tasks; it also offers superior performance in lightly-threaded applications according to these results.

The Ryzen 5 7235HS, while losing all head-to-head comparisons, does have a distinct advantage in power efficiency and form factor. Its 45W TDP is a fraction of the EPYC 7742’s 225W TDP. This makes it suitable for mobile or compact systems where cooling and power draw are critical constraints. The Ryzen 5 7235HS also integrates a Radeon 660M GPU, a feature the EPYC 7742 lacks, making it a more complete package for a laptop. However, in terms of raw CPU benchmark performance, the Ryzen 5 7235HS has no wins to its name.

The Verdict

The data is conclusive for users prioritizing raw compute performance. The AMD EPYC 7742 is the definitive choice. Its 464.1% lead in Cinebench R23 multicore and 464.4% lead in single-core demonstrate an overwhelming performance advantage. This processor is designed for server and workstation workloads where maximum throughput is paramount. The data shows it delivers on that promise, outperforming the mobile Ryzen chip by a factor of over five in every tested scenario.

The AMD Ryzen 5 7235HS is the choice only for scenarios where the EPYC 7742 is not viable due to physical or power constraints. Its 45W TDP, compared to the EPYC’s 225W, allows for deployment in laptops and other power-sensitive devices. The integrated Radeon 660M graphics provide a complete solution without a discrete GPU. However, the benchmark results indicate a massive performance deficit. The Ryzen 5 7235HS scores 10,418 in Cinebench R23 multicore, which is respectable for a mobile chip, but it is not in the same league as the EPYC 7742’s 58,769.

In short, the EPYC 7742 is for users who need the absolute maximum processing power, regardless of power consumption. The Ryzen 5 7235HS is for users who need a low-power processor with integrated graphics for a mobile form factor. The benchmark data provides no reason to choose the Ryzen 5 7235HS on performance grounds alone. The verdict is clear: the EPYC 7742 wins on every performance metric measured, while the Ryzen 5 7235HS wins on power efficiency and integration.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher score in the Cinebench R23 multicore test?

A: The AMD EPYC 7742 has a significantly higher score of 58,769, compared to the AMD Ryzen 5 7235HS’s 10,418. This represents a 464.1% advantage for the EPYC 7742.

Q: Does the Ryzen 5 7235HS win any of the head-to-head benchmarks?

A: No. The data shows the EPYC 7742 winning all 6 head-to-head benchmarks, with the Ryzen 5 7235HS winning 0.

Q: What is the performance difference in single-core Cinebench R20?

A: The EPYC 7742 scores 3,484, while the Ryzen 5 7235HS scores 617. The EPYC 7742 is 464.7% faster in this test.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The AMD EPYC 7742 has a TDP of 225W, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7235HS has a TDP of 45W.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7235HS includes a Radeon 660M integrated GPU. The AMD EPYC 7742 has no integrated graphics.

Q: How do the two processors compare in average benchmark score?

A: The AMD EPYC 7742 has an average benchmark score of 16,998, and the AMD Ryzen 5 7235HS has an average benchmark score of 16,902. They are very close, but the EPYC 7742 is slightly higher.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures targeting different markets. The AMD EPYC 7742 is based on the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Rome, and is part of the EPYC 7002 series. It uses a 7 nm process node and is fabricated by TSMC. The processor features a massive 256 MB of shared L3 cache and 96 KB of L1 cache per core, with 512 KB of L2 cache per core. This design is optimized for server workloads, supporting eight-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. It fits into an AMD Socket SP3 and has a transistor count of 3,800 million on a die size of 74 mm².

In contrast, the AMD Ryzen 5 7235HS is based on the Zen 3+ architecture, codenamed Rembrandt-R, and is part of the 7000 series. It uses a more advanced 6 nm process node, also from TSMC. The Ryzen chip has a much smaller 8 MB shared L3 cache and 64 KB of L1 cache per core, with the same 512 KB of L2 cache per core. It supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s and fits into an AMD Socket FP7. The Ryzen 5 7235HS has a larger die size of 210 mm², and its transistor count is not listed. A key architectural difference is the inclusion of an integrated Radeon 660M GPU in the Ryzen, which the EPYC lacks. Both support PCIe Gen 4, but the Ryzen specifies 20 lanes (CPU only).

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal stark contrasts in core configuration and memory support. The EPYC 7742 features 64 cores and 128 threads, while the Ryzen 5 7235HS has 4 cores and 8 threads. This 16x difference in core count is the primary driver of the massive performance gap. Clock speeds also differ, with the Ryzen 5 7235HS having a higher base clock of 3.20 GHz and boost clock of 4.20 GHz, compared to the EPYC 7742’s 2.25 GHz base and 3.40 GHz boost. Despite the higher clocks on the Ryzen, the EPYC still wins in single-core benchmarks, which is attributable to the architectural differences.

The memory support is another major differentiator. The EPYC 7742 uses an eight-channel DDR4 memory bus with a theoretical bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. The Ryzen 5 7235HS uses a dual-channel DDR5 bus with a bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. This gives the EPYC a massive memory bandwidth advantage, which is critical for server workloads. The TDP is also vastly different: 225W for the EPYC versus 45W for the Ryzen. The socket types are incompatible (Socket SP3 vs Socket FP7). Both processors support ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The EPYC 7742 has a release date of 2019-08-06, while the Ryzen 5 7235HS release date is not listed. The EPYC 7742’s part number is 100-000000053, and the Ryzen 5 7235HS’s is 100-000001507.