AMD EPYC 9374F vs AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE Comparison

The AMD EPYC 9374F and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE represent opposite ends of the processor spectrum, yet both sit at the 71st percentile of all CPUs tracked. The EPYC 9374F is a 32-core Zen 4 server behemoth built for massive parallelism, while the Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE is a 4-core Zen 3 desktop chip with integrated graphics. Their average benchmark scores are remarkably close—17,693 for the EPYC versus 17,482 for the Ryzen—but that similarity masks a complete divergence in workload characteristics. The EPYC wins all six head-to-head comparisons, with margins ranging from 542.7% to 543.5%, which reflects a 32-core versus 4-core core-count gap that no architectural refinement can bridge.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 9374F has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE has 4 cores and 8 threads. This 8x core advantage and 8x thread advantage directly explains the EPYC’s massive lead in multi-threaded benchmarks.

Q: How do their single-core benchmark scores compare?

A: The EPYC 9374F leads in every single-core test. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC scores 9,841 against the Ryzen’s 1,531, a 542.8% advantage. The EPYC’s 4.30 GHz boost clock versus the Ryzen’s 4.20 GHz boost clock, combined with newer Zen 4 architecture, produces this substantial per-thread performance edge.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences?

A: The EPYC 9374F supports DDR5 memory across a twelve-channel bus, delivering 460.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE supports DDR4 across a dual-channel bus, providing 51.2 GB/s. That is a 9x difference in theoretical memory bandwidth, which heavily influences multi-core workloads that saturate memory controllers.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: No. The Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE includes Radeon Vega 6 integrated graphics, making it suitable for systems without a discrete GPU. The EPYC 9374F has no integrated graphics, reflecting its server/workstation role where discrete accelerators are standard.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The EPYC 9374F has an average benchmark score of 17,693, which is 1.2% higher than the Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE’s 17,482. Despite the EPYC’s overwhelming lead in Cinebench tests, the Ryzen’s PassMark results—including 4,4665 in integer math and 24,115 in floating-point math—keep its overall average competitive.

Q: What is the production status and release timeline for each?

A: Both processors are listed as Active in production. The EPYC 9374F was released on 2022-11-09, while the Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE was released on 2024-09-04. The Ryzen is a newer product despite being built on older Zen 3 architecture.

Architecture Differences

The EPYC 9374F is built on TSMC’s 5 nm process with Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Genoa, while the Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE uses TSMC’s 7 nm process with Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Cezanne. This two-generation gap in process technology results in significant transistor density differences: the EPYC packs 52,560 million transistors across an 8x 72 mm² die configuration, whereas the Ryzen uses 10,700 million transistors on a single 180 mm² die.

Cache hierarchies reflect their divergent roles. The EPYC provides 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, with a massive 256 MB shared L3 cache. The Ryzen provides the same 64 KB L1 per core but only 512 KB of L2 per core and 8 MB of L3 cache. The EPYC’s 32x larger L3 cache is critical for server workloads with large working sets, while the Ryzen’s smaller cache suits desktop tasks.

Memory and I/O capabilities separate them further. The EPYC uses twelve-channel DDR5 with 460.8 GB/s bandwidth and 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, while the Ryzen uses dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth and 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. Both support ECC memory, but the EPYC’s memory subsystem is designed for maximum throughput, whereas the Ryzen targets mainstream cost-effectiveness. The Ryzen includes Radeon Vega 6 integrated graphics; the EPYC has none.

Power envelopes highlight their positioning: the EPYC has a 320 W TDP on AMD Socket SP5, while the Ryzen has a 35 W TDP on AMD Socket AM4. That is a 9x difference in power draw, enabling the EPYC to sustain 32 active Zen 4 cores while the Ryzen operates as a low-power desktop part. The EPYC’s launch MSRP is $4850, while the Ryzen has no stated launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite reveals a consistent and overwhelming pattern: the EPYC 9374F leads every test by nearly identical margins. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the EPYC scores 7,026 against the Ryzen’s 1,093, a 542.8% advantage. Single-core R15 shows 991 versus 154, a 543.5% lead. Moving to R20, multicore results are 29,276 versus 4,555 (542.7% ahead), and single-core is 4,133 versus 643 (542.8% ahead).

Cinebench R23 confirms the trend with the largest absolute numbers: multicore scores are 69,707 versus 10,846, a 542.7% delta, while single-core is 9,841 versus 1,531, a 542.8% delta. The consistency of these percentages—all within 0.8 percentage points of each other—indicates that the EPYC’s advantage is nearly linear across core counts and clock frequencies. The EPYC’s 3.85 GHz base clock versus the Ryzen’s 3.60 GHz base clock, plus its 4.30 GHz boost versus 4.20 GHz boost, means even per-core performance favors the EPYC, not just raw core quantity.

The Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE does not win any of the six head-to-head benchmarks. However, its PassMark results, which are not part of the head-to-head comparison, show relative strengths. The Ryzen scores 44,665 in integer math, 24,115 in floating-point math, and 3,089 in single-thread tests. These PassMark numbers are not directly comparable to the EPYC, which lacks PassMark data in this comparison, so they cannot offset the Cinebench dominance.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: the AMD EPYC 9374F is categorically superior in every measured benchmark, with margins exceeding 540% in all six head-to-head tests. This is not a close contest—the EPYC’s 32 cores, 256 MB L3 cache, and 460.8 GB/s memory bandwidth create an insurmountable advantage for any workload that scales with parallel resources. The Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE, with 4 cores and 8 MB L3 cache, is fundamentally a different class of processor.

Who should pick the EPYC 9374F? Any workload involving multi-threaded rendering, scientific computing, or database processing will benefit from its 69,707 Cinebench R23 multicore score. Its 71st percentile ranking, shared with the Ryzen, is misleading; the EPYC’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-1255U and Intel Core i3-13100F with average scores within 0.3%, but those are low-power mobile and desktop parts, not server processors. The EPYC is designed for Socket SP5 server platforms with twelve-channel DDR5 and 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes.

Who should pick the Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE? The data does not support choosing it for raw compute, as it loses every head-to-head test by over 500%. Its strengths lie elsewhere: a 35 W TDP, integrated Radeon Vega 6 graphics, and Socket AM4 compatibility make it suitable for compact desktops or embedded systems where power efficiency and simplicity matter more than performance. Its PassMark scores—including 12,761 in multithread and 3,089 in single-thread—indicate respectable per-watt performance for basic productivity.

The verdict is unambiguous for performance-oriented buyers: the EPYC 9374F dominates all measured metrics. The Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE only makes sense in scenarios where the EPYC cannot physically fit—it requires a different socket, memory type, and power infrastructure. The 542.7% to 543.5% deltas across all Cinebench tests represent a near-perfect linear scaling from 4 to 32 cores, with the EPYC also holding a slight clock advantage.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. Core count differs: 32 cores for the EPYC versus 4 cores for the Ryzen. Thread count is 64 versus 8. Base clocks are 3.85 GHz versus 3.60 GHz, and boost clocks are 4.30 GHz versus 4.20 GHz. TDP is 320 W versus 35 W. Sockets are AMD Socket SP5 versus AMD Socket AM4.

Architecture and process node differ: Zen 4 on 5 nm versus Zen 3 on 7 nm, with codenames Genoa versus Cezanne. Transistor counts are 52,560 million versus 10,700 million. Die configuration is 8x 72 mm² versus a single 180 mm². Cache differs: L2 is 1 MB per core versus 512 KB per core, and L3 is 256 MB shared versus 8 MB.

Memory support differs: DDR5 versus DDR4, twelve-channel versus dual-channel, and 460.8 GB/s versus 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. PCIe is Gen 5 with 128 lanes versus Gen 3 with 16 lanes. Integrated graphics are absent on the EPYC but present as Radeon Vega 6 on the Ryzen. Market segment is Server/Workstation versus Desktop. Release dates are 2022-11-09 versus 2024-09-04. The EPYC has a launch MSRP of $4850; the Ryzen has none. Part numbers are 100-100000792 versus 100-000001751. Both have ECC memory support and locked multipliers.