AMD EPYC 4345P vs AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD EPYC 4345P is the dominant performer in this comparison, winning 16 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark tests. The lone exception is PassMark floating point math, where the Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 edges ahead by a narrow 0.5%. The EPYC part leads by double-digit margins across most Cinebench tests (12.2% to 12.3%) and in PassMark single-thread (12.6%), while its largest advantage appears in physics (40.2%) and prime number finding (33.6%).

The EPYC 4345P also holds a higher overall standing in the database, with a 90th percentile rank among all CPUs versus 89th for the Ryzen AI part. Its average benchmark score of 48,470 is about 3.1% higher than the Ryzen's 47,022. The EPYC's closest rival is the Intel Core i5-14600K, which sits just 0.3% behind, while the Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375's nearest competitor is the AMD Ryzen 9 5900, which trails by 0.1%.

For users who prioritize raw compute throughput, the EPYC 4345P is the clear choice. It delivers higher scores in every multithreaded Cinebench test, all PassMark integer and encryption workloads, and even single-threaded tasks. The Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, however, offers a 12-core/24-thread configuration with a much lower 28 W TDP and integrated Radeon 890M graphics, making it more suitable for mobile or power-constrained environments where the EPYC's 65 W TDP and server-oriented design are less practical.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on AMD's Zen 5 architecture and manufactured on a 4 nm TSMC process, but they diverge significantly in almost every other design aspect.

The EPYC 4345P, codenamed Grado, belongs to the EPYC 4005 series and targets the server/workstation segment. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. Its TDP is 65 W, and it uses the AMD Socket AM5. The die size is 70.6 mm², and the transistor count is 8,315 million. Cache allocation includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. Memory support covers DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, and ECC memory is enabled. PCIe connectivity is Gen 5 with 24 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics are present as Radeon Graphics, but the part is not multiplier-unlocked.

The Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375, codenamed Strix Point, belongs to the Ryzen AI PRO 300 series and is designed for mobile platforms. It packs 12 cores and 24 threads, but with a much lower base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. Its TDP is 28 W, and it uses the AMD Socket FP8. The die is considerably larger at 233 mm², though the transistor count is not recorded. L1 and L2 caches match the EPYC per core (80 KB and 1 MB respectively), but L3 is halved to 16 MB. Memory support expands to both DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus, retaining the same 89.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC capability. PCIe is Gen 4 with only 16 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics are the Radeon 890M, which is a more advanced integrated solution than the EPYC's basic Radeon Graphics.

The hybrid core approach in the Ryzen AI part (Zen 5 and Zen 5c) explains its higher core count but lower clocks, while the EPYC's monolithic 8-core design with higher boost frequencies drives its benchmark superiority.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The EPYC 4345P wins all three Cinebench generations by identical margins. In Cinebench R15, it scores 3,227 versus 2,875 for the Ryzen, a 12.2% lead. Single-core R15 shows 455 versus 405, a 12.3% edge. R20 multicore repeats the 12.2% delta with 13,448 against 11,982, and R20 single-core also hits 12.2% (1,898 versus 1,691). R23 multicore is 32,020 versus 28,529 (12.2%), and R23 single-core is 4,520 versus 4,027 (12.2%). These consistent percentages indicate a uniform per-core performance advantage, not a scaling effect.

PassMark results show a more varied picture. Data compression is close: 421,490 versus 416,331, a 1.2% win for the EPYC. Data encryption is more decisive: 23,313 versus 21,186, a 10% margin. Extended instructions favor the EPYC by 7.9% (31,663 versus 29,351). Prime number finding is a major EPYC win: 167 versus 125, a 33.6% jump. Floating point math is the only Ryzen victory: 74,626 versus 74,255, a 0.5% edge. Integer math goes to the EPYC by 3.6% (123,774 versus 119,521). Multithreaded performance is 7.2% higher for the EPYC (36,123 versus 33,689). Physics is the largest PassMark gap: 2,583 versus 1,843, a 40.2% lead. Random string sorting is close at 1.9% (46,238 versus 45,358). Single-thread tests show a 12.6% advantage for the EPYC (4,408 versus 3,914).

The pattern is clear: the EPYC wins decisively in most workloads, with its smallest victories in data compression and random string sorting, and its largest in physics and prime number finding. The Ryzen only manages a marginal win in floating point math, which does not offset the broader deficit.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher single-threaded performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 4345P leads in all single-thread tests. Cinebench R15 single-core is 455 versus 405 (12.3%), R20 single-core is 1,898 versus 1,691 (12.2%), R23 single-core is 4,520 versus 4,027 (12.2%), and PassMark single-thread is 4,408 versus 3,914 (12.6%).

Q: Does the Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 ever outperform the EPYC 4345P?

A: Yes, in one recorded test: PassMark floating point math scores 74,626 for the Ryzen versus 74,255 for the EPYC, a 0.5% advantage. No other head-to-head test favors the Ryzen.

Q: How do their core and thread counts compare?

A: The EPYC 4345P has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 has 12 cores and 24 threads. Despite fewer cores, the EPYC wins 16 of 17 benchmarks, due to higher clocks (5.50 GHz boost versus 5.10 GHz) and a larger 32 MB L3 cache versus 16 MB.

Q: What memory and PCIe features differ?

A: Both support dual-channel DDR5 with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC. The EPYC uses Gen 5 PCIe with 24 lanes, while the Ryzen uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes. The Ryzen also adds LPDDR5X memory support.

Q: Which processor has the higher overall benchmark score?

A: The EPYC 4345P averages 48,470 across all recorded tests, placing it in the 90th percentile. The Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 averages 47,022, placing it in the 89th percentile.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The EPYC 4345P has a TDP of 65 W, while the Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 is rated at 28 W. The Ryzen's lower power envelope aligns with its mobile Socket FP8 design.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 4345P is the clear winner for compute-heavy, latency-sensitive server and workstation workloads. Its 12.2% to 12.3% margins across all Cinebench versions indicate strong multicore rendering capability, and its 33.6% lead in prime number finding plus 40.2% in physics suggests excellent integer and simulation performance. The 10% advantage in data encryption and 7.9% in extended instructions makes it suitable for security and cryptography tasks. The 12.6% single-thread lead benefits legacy or lightly threaded applications. Its 65 W TDP and Socket AM5 platform position it for compact single-socket servers, especially where ECC memory and Gen 5 PCIe lanes are required.

The Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375 wins only in floating point math by 0.5%, which is negligible. However, its 12-core/24-thread configuration and 28 W TDP make it attractive for high-end mobile workstations where power efficiency is critical. The integrated Radeon 890M graphics provide more capable on-chip visuals than the EPYC's basic Radeon Graphics. Its support for LPDDR5X memory and Socket FP8 confirms a mobile-first design. For users who need 24 threads in a low-power chassis, the Ryzen part offers that capability, but the benchmark data shows it trails the EPYC in nearly every measured performance category. The EPYC 4345P is the faster processor across the board, and the Ryzen's only meaningful advantage is its power envelope and mobile form factor.