AMD EPYC 4244P vs AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX Comparison

The AMD EPYC 4244P and AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX are both six-core, twelve-thread Zen 4 parts built on the 5 nm TSMC process, sharing the same 6,570-million-transistor die and 71 mm² size. Yet the benchmark data reveals they are not interchangeable. The EPYC 4244P, a server/workstation chip on Socket AM5, dominates the Ryzen 5 7645HX, a mobile part on Socket FL1, in the vast majority of tests. The Ryzen 5 7645HX, however, holds its own in a few specific workloads, making the choice between them entirely a matter of workload profile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the head-to-head comparison is the Cinebench R23 multi-core score, where the EPYC 4244P posts 23,089 against the Ryzen 5 7645HX’s 13,985. That is a 65.1% advantage for the EPYC part. Even more dramatic is the Cinebench R23 single-core result: the EPYC scores 3,259 versus 1,809 for the Ryzen, a delta of 80.2%. This is a massive lead in a test that typically reflects per-core efficiency and clock behavior. The EPYC’s 5.10 GHz boost clock versus the Ryzen’s 5.00 GHz helps explain part of this, but the gap is far larger than the 0.10 GHz difference suggests. The data indicates the EPYC’s power envelope—65 W TDP versus 45 W for the Ryzen—allows it to sustain higher performance in these burst workloads.

Cinebench R15 tells a similar story, albeit with smaller margins. In R15 multi-core, the EPYC scores 2,327 to the Ryzen’s 2,276, a 2.2% win. Single-core R15 shows the EPYC ahead by 13.5% (328 versus 289). These results, while less extreme than R23, reinforce the pattern: the EPYC is consistently faster in Cinebench’s rendering and physics simulations. The physics test in Passmark is another standout. The EPYC scores 1,981 versus 1,497, a 32.3% advantage. That is a substantial lead in a test that stresses CPU physics calculations, often tied to gaming and simulation workloads.

In the Passmark suite, the EPYC wins 11 of 15 head-to-head comparisons. Data compression is nearly a tie: 302,606 for the EPYC versus 302,256 for the Ryzen, a 0.1% margin. Data encryption also favors the EPYC, 18,232 versus 17,900, a 1.9% edge. Integer math goes to the EPYC at 78,709 versus 77,432, a 1.6% win. Prime number finding is another EPYC win, 187 versus 178, a 5.1% margin. The EPYC also takes multithread at 26,797 versus 26,476 (1.2%) and random string sorting at 38,048 versus 34,434 (10.5%).

The Ryzen 5 7645HX does have its moments. In floating-point math, it scores 48,798 versus the EPYC’s 45,546, a 6.7% win. Extended instructions go to the Ryzen as well, 22,969 versus 22,149, a 3.6% edge. Most notably, the Ryzen wins in Passmark single-thread: 3,907 versus 3,710, a 5% advantage. This is a meaningful result because it shows the mobile chip can outpace the server part in certain single-threaded integer and general-purpose tasks, despite the EPYC’s higher boost clock. The Ryzen also wins the duplicated single-thread test by the same 5% margin. These four wins out of fifteen may seem small, but they are concentrated in areas that matter for specific applications.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 4244P is the clear winner in heavy multi-threaded rendering and physics. Its 65.1% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 32.3% lead in Passmark physics make it the obvious choice for workloads that stress all cores simultaneously with sustained load. The data also shows the EPYC ahead in integer math, encryption, and data compression, though by smaller margins (1.6%, 1.9%, and 0.1% respectively). For server-style tasks like database processing, virtualization, or any workload that relies on integer throughput and cryptographic operations, the EPYC’s consistent edge—even when small—is worth noting. Its wins in random string sorting (10.5%) and prime number finding (5.1%) further suggest it handles algorithmic and sorting tasks more efficiently.

The Ryzen 5 7645HX, on the other hand, wins where floating-point math and extended instruction sets are the bottleneck. Its 6.7% lead in floating-point math and 3.6% lead in extended instructions indicate it is better suited for scientific computing, financial modeling, or any application that leverages AVX-512 or similar instruction sets. The Ryzen’s 5% advantage in single-threaded Passmark is also significant. For everyday desktop use, web browsing, office applications, or lightly-threaded legacy software, the Ryzen’s higher single-thread score suggests snappier responsiveness in tasks that cannot utilize multiple cores. The Ryzen also achieves this performance at a lower 45 W TDP, making it a more power-efficient option for mobile or compact systems where thermal headroom is limited.

The average benchmark scores reflect this split. The EPYC has an average benchmark score of 34,220, while the Ryzen sits at 33,668. Both CPUs land at the 84th percentile among all CPUs, meaning they are statistically tied in overall performance. The EPYC’s nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 (deltaPct 0), the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X (deltaPct -0.1), and the Intel Core i5-13450HX (deltaPct -0.3). The Ryzen’s nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS (deltaPct 0), the AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT (deltaPct -0.2), and the AMD Ryzen 5 240 (deltaPct 0.4). These deltas are all within fractions of a percent, confirming that both chips perform at essentially the same overall level, despite their different workload-specific strengths.

The Verdict

Choose the AMD EPYC 4244P if your priority is raw multi-threaded rendering, physics simulation, or server-class integer workloads. The data is unambiguous: it is 65.1% faster than the Ryzen 5 7645HX in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 32.3% faster in Passmark physics. For anyone running Cinebench, Blender, or similar renderers, this is a decisive advantage. The EPYC also edges out the Ryzen in multithread (1.2%), integer math (1.6%), and data encryption (1.9%), making it the safer choice for mixed server duties. Its launch MSRP is $229, though that figure should not be the primary driver of a decision based on workload fit.

Choose the AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX if your workloads are floating-point heavy or rely on extended instruction sets. Its 6.7% win in floating-point math and 3.6% win in extended instructions are not trivial for scientific or engineering applications. The Ryzen also wins in single-threaded Passmark by 5%, which may translate to better performance in older or poorly-threaded games and applications. Its lower 45 W TDP makes it a better fit for thin-and-light laptops or compact desktops where power and cooling are constrained. If you need the best per-core performance in a mobile form factor, the Ryzen is the data-backed pick.

For a general-purpose user who does a bit of everything, the two CPUs are effectively tied. Both sit at the 84th percentile, and their average benchmark scores differ by only 552 points (34,220 versus 33,668). The EPYC’s dominance in Cinebench and physics is balanced by the Ryzen’s wins in floating-point and single-thread tests. In this case, the decision should rest on platform: the EPYC requires Socket AM5 and offers server-grade features, while the Ryzen uses Socket FL1 and is designed for mobile systems. The data does not support a clear overall winner, but it strongly supports picking the right tool for the specific job.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD EPYC 4244P scores 23,089 versus the AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX’s 13,985, giving the EPYC a 65.1% advantage.

Q: Does the Ryzen 5 7645HX win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins four of fifteen head-to-head tests: floating-point math (48,798 versus 45,546, a 6.7% edge), extended instructions (22,969 versus 22,149, a 3.6% edge), and single-thread Passmark (3,907 versus 3,710, a 5% edge).

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD EPYC 4244P has a 65 W TDP, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX has a 45 W TDP.

Q: Do both CPUs have the same cache configuration?

A: Yes, both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which chip is better for physics simulations?

A: The AMD EPYC 4244P, which scores 1,981 in Passmark physics versus 1,497 for the Ryzen 5 7645HX, a 32.3% lead.

Q: Are the average benchmark scores similar?

A: Yes, the EPYC 4244P has an average score of 34,220, and the Ryzen 5 7645HX has 33,668. Both are at the 84th percentile among all CPUs.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs share a core architectural foundation but differ in platform and packaging. Both are built on Zen 4 architecture, use the 5 nm process from TSMC, and pack 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die. The cache hierarchy is identical: 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. Both support DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth and feature ECC memory support. Both also provide PCIe Gen 5 with 28 lanes from the CPU.

The key differences are in socket, clock speeds, and integrated graphics. The EPYC 4244P uses AMD Socket AM5, runs a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, and integrates Radeon Graphics. The Ryzen 5 7645HX uses AMD Socket FL1, runs a base clock of 4.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, and integrates Radeon 610M graphics. The EPYC is classified as a Server/Workstation part, while the Ryzen is a Mobile part. The EPYC was released on 2024-05-20, while the Ryzen came earlier on 2023-01-03. Neither CPU has an unlocked multiplier. The EPYC’s launch MSRP is $229; the Ryzen’s launch MSRP is not listed. The EPYC’s codename is Raphael, while the Ryzen’s is Dragon Range. These platform differences explain the performance variance: the EPYC’s higher boost clock and TDP allow it to sustain higher multi-threaded performance, while the Ryzen’s lower TDP and mobile orientation prioritize power efficiency and single-thread responsiveness.