AMD EPYC 7543 vs AMD EPYC 7502

Processor comparisons 25-03-2021

   For example you can't decide which CPU to buy, you can make a choice after reading the full tests AMD EPYC 7543 vs AMD EPYC 7502 and understand which is better for games or simple use for rendering, programming, machine learning, video editing, streaming. Here you can find all information from many benchmarks or real streaming and video editing tests. A step-by-step analysis of all the technical characteristics, to make it easier to read, is presented in the form of the table.
   From the comparison video, you can get the results of parallel examination in special test applications like Cinebench 23 (20, 15), PCMark 10, Dolphin Emulator, SuperPi, Furmark, DaVinci Resolve Studio, VeraCrypt, AIDA64, Gears 5, 7zip, PassMark, Blender, Prime95, MATLAB, World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, Handbrake, UserBenchmark, RealBench, Blender, Geekbench 5.2, 3DMark, WPrime.
   Gaming performance of processors in:

Cyberpunk 2077
DOOM: Eternal
Valheim
Last Man Standing
Death Stranding
Rainbow Six Siege
Halo Infinite
Fallout 76
Overwatch
Apex Legends
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and Warzone
Fortnite
Watch Dogs Legion
Grand Theft Auto V
Assassin's Creed Valhalla
Valorant
Red Dead Redemption 2
Borderlands 3

After reading the results of all benchmarks and videos, you already be able to figure out which CPU is better to buy for gaming AMD EPYC 7502 or AMD EPYC 7543.

Summary benchmark results

As a percentage of the maximum value based on a sample from the entire base of all processors
Processor Benchmark

EPYC 7543

75%

EPYC 7502

74%

This shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, EPYC 7543 is 1% better than EPYC 7502. The data source is several popular tests. More detailed information of the benchmarks is below.

Gaming performance
Summary result of all game benchmarks.

EPYC 7543

76%

EPYC 7502

86%

For the maximum in this test, the results of the most powerful processor in the site database are taken. And of course, this is a server processor, on which no one will play games. Because the cost of this processor reaches several tens of thousands of dollars. Therefore, if you think that the selected CPU has a small game result, just look at the FPS that it produces in real games in the final table below.
List of other games in which processors were compared: Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO), Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, Hitman 3, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, DOTA 2A, Microsoft Flight Simulator, Forza Horizon 4, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Ghostrunner, NBA 2K20, Half-Life: Alyx, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), Control, Horizon Zero Dawn, Battlefield V, League of Legends (LOL), Metro Exodus, Monster Hunter World.

Gaming benchmark

Fortnite	134.8	151.5
Valorant	153.2	172.2
Cyberpunk 2077	85.8	96.4
Apex Legends	144.0	161.9
Call of Duty Warzone	114.9	129.2
Overwatch	124.1	139.5
Red Dead Redemption 2	105.7	118.8
DOOM Eternal	76.6	86.1
Warzone	119.5	134.3
Assassin's Creed	128.7	144.7
Valheim	127.2	142.9

The numbers in this table indicate the maximum FPS that was received on the device with the corresponding processor. Depending on the configuration of the computer (RAM size and Video Card) and graphics quality settings (Ultra, Medium, Normal), the results may differ quite significantly. We recommend that you better study the results of the Cinebench, GeekBench and Passmark becnmarks.
The computers participating in the comparing not only were the equipped with different video cards and different amounts of RAM. But users also tested them at different screen resolutions: FullHD, 2K or 4K. Therefore, the game benchmark data is approximate. But all video cards met the average system requirements of games. You will get more accurate information about how powerful the processor will be in games, if you get acquainted with the benchmarks that are made with the same video card that is installed in your computer.

Power consumption

EPYC 7543

20%

EPYC 7502

17%

To make a finishing choice on which processor is better, you should also consider the generation of its core. The newer the processor generation, the better its performance in games and benchmarks, as well as its energy efficiency. In this case the EPYC 7543 is more energy efficient than the EPYC 7502 since it has less power consumption: 225W vs. 180W. Power consumption is especially important for laptops. And TDP should be taken into account when choosing a processor cooling system. It is necessary to calculate so that the TDP data specified in the cooler specification is greater than the TDP of the compared processor.

Software benchmarks

If you plan to use the processor not only for gaming, but also for machine learning, video editing or video rendering, streaming, programming, then the main parameter for you is its performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, to reach maximum efficiency, the processor turns on all cores and threads that it has. You will learn this data from the benchmark tables below. Before using the data from these tests, be sure to check whether the program you are going to use on your computer supports multi-threaded mode. Since there are still many programs that use only one core to work, and all the benefit of multi-core mode are unused.

Cinebench 23, 20 an 15
The results of this benchmark show Single-threaded and Multi-threaded CPU performance

	AMD EPYC 7543	AMD EPYC 7502
Cinbench 15 Single-core	164	160
Cinbench 15 Multi-core	6747	6608
Cinbench 20 Single-core	307	391
Cinbench 20 Multi-core	14301	14007
Cinbench 23 Single-core	756	740
Cinbench 23 Multi-core	37190	36424

Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance

	AMD EPYC 7543	AMD EPYC 7502
Single-Core	1592	2094
Multi-Core	54553	53430

GeekBench 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance

	AMD EPYC 7543	AMD EPYC 7502
Single-Core	1391	939
Multi-Core	30306	41117

Comparison of specifications

In the specification comparison table, the most helpful will be the release date of the processor and the possibility of overclocking it. The later the processor is released, the longer it will last you. And the easier it will be to upgrade the system later. The same benefits from the presence of overclocking. If the processor can be overclocked, increasing its performance, then it will continue to maintain maximum FPS even in new games. The savings are obvious! It turns out that you do not need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer.

	AMD EPYC 7543	AMD EPYC 7502
Announcement date	March 15, 2021	October 01, 2020
Type	Server	Server
Socket	SP3	SP3
Core name	Milan	Rome
Architecture	Zen 3	Zen 2
Generation	3	2
Turbo Frequency	3.7 MHz	3.4 MHz
Frequency	2.8 MHz	2.5 MHz
Cores	32	32
Threads	64	64
Bus rate
Bit	64	64
Lithography	7 nm	7 nm
Transistors count	68000 millions	64000 millions
Power consumption (TDP)	225 W	180 W
Memory type	DDR4	DDR4
Max. Memory
Memory Frequency	3200
Memory bandwidth	204.8 GB/s
L1 cache
L2 cache
L3 cache	256MB	128MB
Overclocking	No	Yes
Supports ECC	No	No
Part number	100-000000345 100-100000319WOF	100-000000054 100-100000054WOF

In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here EPYC 7543 is 10% better than EPYC 7502 in terms of CPU frequency. Also keep in mind that high CPU frequency affects battery life through power consumption (relevant for laptops).

Result:
The number of parameters for which AMD EPYC 7543 is better: 15
The number of parameters for which AMD EPYC 7502 is better: 16
Although it should be understood that all the data in the text above do not mean that you should be guided entirely by them and trust a simple quantitative comparison. Better to watch the video tests and read the opinion of real owners of AMD EPYC 7543 and AMD EPYC 7502 before making a choice which of the processors to buy for gaming.

AMD EPYC 7543 - all data

• Cinebench r15 score
• Cinebench r20 score
• Cinebench r23 score
• GeekBench 5 score

• AMD EPYC 7543 specs and review.

• AMD EPYC 7502 specs and review.