EPYC 7F72
Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395
EPYC 7F72 vs Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 Performance Spectrum
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 7F72 vs Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
EPYC 7F72 vs Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
EPYC 7F72
2020Why buy it
- ✅+2.3% higher PassMark.
- ✅+200% larger total L3 cache (192 MB vs 64 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅700% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $2,131 MSRP, while Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌336.4% higher power demand at 240W vs 55W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 moves to FP11 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +12.4% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 240W, a 185W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FP11 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with AMD Radeon 8060S, while EPYC 7F72 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (51,646 vs 52,840).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (64 MB vs 192 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7F72, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 better than EPYC 7F72?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
EPYC 7F72 vs Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
EPYC 7F72
The EPYC 7F72 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 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 192 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 240 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 52,840 points. Launch price was $2,450.
Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395
The Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2025-01-01. It is based on the Strix Halo (2025) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FP11. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 51,646 points. Launch price was $500.
Processing Power
The EPYC 7F72 packs 24 cores / 48 threads, while the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the EPYC 7F72 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the EPYC 7F72 versus 5.1 GHz on the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 — a 31.8% clock advantage for the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 (base: 3.2 GHz vs 3 GHz). The EPYC 7F72 uses the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture (7 nm, 14 nm), while the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 uses Strix Halo (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7F72 scores 52,840 against the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395's 51,646 — a 2.3% lead for the EPYC 7F72. L3 cache: 192 MB (total) on the EPYC 7F72 vs 64 MB (total) on the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395.
| Feature | EPYC 7F72 | Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 24 / 48+50% | 16 / 32 |
| Boost Clock | 3.7 GHz | 5.1 GHz+38% |
| Base Clock | 3.2 GHz+7% | 3 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 192 MB (total)+200% | 64 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 512K (per core)+51100% | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | 7 nm, 14 nm | 4 nm-43% |
| Architecture | Zen 2 (2017−2020) | Strix Halo (2025) |
| PassMark | 52,840+2% | 51,646 |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 7F72 uses the SP3 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 uses FP11 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 3200 on the EPYC 7F72 versus 8000 on the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 — the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 supports 150% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7F72 supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 128 — 3100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 8 (EPYC 7F72) vs 4 (Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 7F72) vs 16 (Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395) — the EPYC 7F72 offers 112 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP3 (EPYC 7F72) and FP11 (Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395).
| Feature | EPYC 7F72 | Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP3 | FP11 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 4.0 | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | 3200 | 8000+150% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4096+3100% | 128 |
| RAM Channels | 8+100% | 4 |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128+700% | 16 |
Advanced Features
Only the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (EPYC 7F72) vs VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V (Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395). The Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 includes integrated graphics (AMD Radeon 8060S), while the EPYC 7F72 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: EPYC 7F72 rivals Xeon Platinum 8260; Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 rivals Core Ultra 7 255HX.
| Feature | EPYC 7F72 | Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | None | AMD Radeon 8060S |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V |
Value Analysis
At launch, the EPYC 7F72 was priced at $2131, while the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 came in at $0. On launch pricing ($2131 vs $0), Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 was $2131 cheaper.
| Feature | EPYC 7F72 | Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $2131 | $0-100% |
| Performance per Dollar | 24.8 | — |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2025 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on EPYC 7F72 and Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395
