EPYC 7301 vs Ryzen 7 1700

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

EPYC 7301 vs Ryzen 7 1700 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

EPYC 7301 vs Ryzen 7 1700: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

EPYC 7301

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +14.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+300% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 16 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads.

Trade-offs

❌161.5% higher power demand at 170W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Ryzen 7 1700.

Ryzen 7 1700

2017

Why buy it

✅Draws 65W instead of 170W, a 105W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 7301.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 7301 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (14,772 vs 14,991).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7301, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads.
❌Launch MSRP is still $140 MSRP, while EPYC 7301 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 7301 better than Ryzen 7 1700?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. EPYC 7301 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Ryzen 7 1700 is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, EPYC 7301 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 14.0% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 7301 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.5% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 300% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 16 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

EPYC 7301 is still the faster CPU overall, but Ryzen 7 1700 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. EPYC 7301 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $140 MSRP, and it still gives you a 14.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Ryzen 7 1700 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (105.5 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Ryzen 7 1700 is the safer long-term CPU choice because it gives you more room to grow and a better platform outlook.

EPYC 7301 vs Ryzen 7 1700 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

EPYC 7301

The EPYC 7301 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 29 June 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Naples (2017−2018) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.7 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: TR4. Thermal design power (TDP): 170 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 14,991 points. Launch price was $825.

Ryzen 7 1700

The Ryzen 7 1700 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2 March 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Zen (2017−2020) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 16384 kB. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 14,772 points. Launch price was $329.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 7301 packs 16 cores / 32 threads, while the Ryzen 7 1700 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the EPYC 7301 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.7 GHz on the EPYC 7301 versus 3.7 GHz on the Ryzen 7 1700 — a 31.3% clock advantage for the Ryzen 7 1700 (base: 2.2 GHz vs 3 GHz). The EPYC 7301 uses the Naples (2017−2018) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen 7 1700 uses Zen (2017−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7301 scores 14,991 against the Ryzen 7 1700's 14,772 — a 1.5% lead for the EPYC 7301. L3 cache: 64 MB (total) on the EPYC 7301 vs 16384 kB on the Ryzen 7 1700.

Feature	EPYC 7301	Ryzen 7 1700
Cores / Threads	16 / 32+100%	8 / 16
Boost Clock	2.7 GHz	3.7 GHz+37%
Base Clock	2.2 GHz	3 GHz+36%
L3 Cache	64 MB (total)+300%	16384 kB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)	4096 kB+700%
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Naples (2017−2018)	Zen (2017−2020)
PassMark	14,991+1%	14,772
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	8,065
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,000
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	5,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 7301 uses the TR4 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Ryzen 7 1700 uses AM4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	EPYC 7301	Ryzen 7 1700
Socket	TR4	AM4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0+33%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR4-2666
Max RAM Capacity	—	128 GB
RAM Channels	—	2
ECC Support	—	Yes
PCIe Lanes	—	24

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (EPYC 7301) / AMD-V (Ryzen 7 1700). Primary use case: Ryzen 7 1700 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Ryzen 7 1700 rivals Core i7-7700K.