EPYC 7F32 vs EPYC 7351

EPYC 7F32 vs EPYC 7351 Performance Spectrum

EPYC 7F32

8 / 16

23,253

+0.1%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen 9 7945HX3D

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

EPYC 7351

16 / 32

23,226

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen 9 7945HX3D

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

About PassMark

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 7F32 vs EPYC 7351 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 7F32 vs EPYC 7351: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

EPYC 7F32

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (32 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $2,100 MSRP, while EPYC 7351 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌16.1% higher power demand at 180W vs 155W.

EPYC 7351

2017

Why buy it

✅+100% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 32 MB).
✅Draws 155W instead of 180W, a 25W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 7F32 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (23,226 vs 23,253).

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 7F32 better than EPYC 7351?

Yes. EPYC 7F32 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 4.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.1% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, EPYC 7F32 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 4.3% 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 7F32 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads.

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

EPYC 7F32 is the better buy right now. EPYC 7F32 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $2,100 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 4.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (11.1 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

EPYC 7F32 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2017) and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 16/32. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

EPYC 7F32 vs EPYC 7351 Technical Specifications

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

EPYC 7F32

The EPYC 7F32 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 14 April 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm, 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 180 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 23,253 points. Launch price was $2,100.

EPYC 7351

The EPYC 7351 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 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 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: 23,226 points. Launch price was $1,100.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 7F32 packs 8 cores / 16 threads, while the EPYC 7351 offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the EPYC 7351 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.9 GHz on the EPYC 7F32 versus 2.9 GHz on the EPYC 7351 — a 29.4% clock advantage for the EPYC 7F32 (base: 3.7 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The EPYC 7F32 uses the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture (7 nm, 14 nm), while the EPYC 7351 uses Naples (2017−2018) (14 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7F32 scores 23,253 against the EPYC 7351's 23,226 — a 0.1% lead for the EPYC 7F32. L3 cache: 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 7F32 vs 64 MB (total) on the EPYC 7351.

Feature	EPYC 7F32	EPYC 7351
Cores / Threads	8 / 16	16 / 32+100%
Boost Clock	3.9 GHz+34%	2.9 GHz
Base Clock	3.7 GHz+54%	2.4 GHz
L3 Cache	32 MB (total)	64 MB (total)+100%
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	512K (per core)
Process	7 nm, 14 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Zen 2 (2017−2020)	Naples (2017−2018)
PassMark	23,253	23,226