AMD EPYC 4364P vs AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear split: the AMD EPYC 4364P wins 9 of the 11 head-to-head comparisons, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D takes 2. The EPYC’s victories are substantial, often exceeding 50%. In data compression, the EPYC scores 408,220 against the Ryzen’s 271,649, a 50.3% advantage. Data encryption shows a 53% gap (24,174 vs. 15,797). Extended instructions favor the EPYC by 54.5% (31,605 vs. 20,455). Floating point math is another rout: 66,946 vs. 43,594, a 53.6% edge. Integer math follows at 52.3% (107,775 vs. 70,774). Random string sorting sees a 46.5% lead for the EPYC (48,344 vs. 32,999).

The multithreaded score is telling. The EPYC’s 33,883 beats the Ryzen’s 25,047 by 35.3%. That reflects the core count difference: 8 cores and 16 threads versus 6 cores and 12 threads. The single-thread comparison is much closer. The EPYC scores 3,619, the Ryzen 3,494, a modest 3.6% lead. So the EPYC is faster per thread, but not by much.

The Ryzen 5 7500X3D’s two wins are both notable for their magnitude. In find prime numbers, the Ryzen scores 221 versus the EPYC’s 177, a 19.9% edge. The bigger win is in physics: the Ryzen’s 2,779 beats the EPYC’s 1,785 by 35.8%. These are the only areas where the Ryzen pulls ahead, and they point to strengths in specific workloads rather than general throughput.

Looking at the rival context, the EPYC 4364P’s average benchmark score of 45,970 places it near the AMD EPYC 7303 (45,960, 0% delta) and the Intel Core i7-14700HX (45,953, 0% delta). It is slightly behind the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 (46,030, -0.1%) and Intel Core Ultra 5 235 (46,062, -0.2%). The Ryzen 5 7500X3D’s average of 44,573 sits among mobile and desktop parts: it is 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H (44,466), 0.5% ahead of the Intel Core i9-13950HX (44,342), and 0.6% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 (44,309), while trailing the Intel Core i5-14600 (44,889) by 0.7%. Both CPUs hold the 89th percentile against all CPUs.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD EPYC 4364P boosts to 5.40 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D boosts to 4.50 GHz.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The EPYC 4364P has 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ryzen 5 7500X3D has 96 MB of shared L3 cache, three times the EPYC’s allocation.

Q: Do both CPUs support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD EPYC 4364P and the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D support ECC memory.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The EPYC 4364P has a 105 W TDP. The Ryzen 5 7500X3D has a 65 W TDP, which is 40 W lower.

Q: Which CPU wins in the physics benchmark?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D wins the PassMark physics test with a score of 2,779, beating the EPYC 4364P’s 1,785 by 35.8%.

Q: Are both CPUs on the same socket?

A: Yes, both the AMD EPYC 4364P and the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D use the AMD Socket AM5.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the Zen 4 architecture with the Raphael codename, fabricated on TSMC’s 5 nm process. They share the same die size of 71 mm², but the transistor counts differ dramatically. The EPYC 4364P packs 6,570 million transistors, while the Ryzen 5 7500X3D has 11,270 million. That larger transistor budget for the Ryzen is explained by its 96 MB of L3 cache, versus the EPYC’s 32 MB. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core. The L3 allocation is the key architectural divergence: the Ryzen’s 96 MB is triple the EPYC’s, which likely drives its wins in cache-sensitive workloads like prime number finding and physics.

The EPYC 4364P is marked as a Server/Workstation part, while the Ryzen 5 7500X3D is a Desktop part. Their generations differ: the EPYC belongs to the EPYC (Zen 4 (Raphael)) generation, the Ryzen to the Ryzen 5 (Zen 4 (Raphael)) generation. Both support DDR5 memory with dual-channel buses and identical 83.2 GB/s memory bandwidth. Integrated graphics are present on both: Radeon Graphics. PCIe lanes differ: the EPYC offers Gen 5 with 28 CPU-only lanes, the Ryzen offers Gen 5 with 24 CPU-only lanes. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The release dates are far apart. The EPYC 4364P launched on 2024-05-20, while the Ryzen 5 7500X3D launched on 2025-11-11. Both are listed as Active in production status.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are the most obvious difference. The EPYC 4364P has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Ryzen 5 7500X3D has 6 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks differ: the EPYC runs at 4.50 GHz, the Ryzen at 4.00 GHz. Boost clocks also differ: 5.40 GHz versus 4.50 GHz. TDP is a major gap: 105 W for the EPYC, 65 W for the Ryzen.

L3 cache is the other big spec split: 32 MB for the EPYC, 96 MB for the Ryzen. L1 and L2 caches are identical per core. Both support DDR5, dual-channel memory, and ECC. The memory bandwidth is the same at 83.2 GB/s. PCIe lane counts differ: 28 for the EPYC, 24 for the Ryzen. Both have Radeon Graphics integrated. The launch MSRP for the EPYC 4364P is $399, and for the Ryzen 5 7500X3D it is $269. The part numbers are 100-000001477 for the EPYC and 100-000001904 for the Ryzen.

Transistor count is a specification difference as well: 6,570 million for the EPYC, 11,270 million for the Ryzen. The die size is the same at 71 mm². The market segment differs: Server/Workstation for the EPYC, Desktop for the Ryzen.

The Verdict

The data points to two different use cases. The AMD EPYC 4364P is the stronger all-around performer, dominating in 9 of 11 benchmarks with leads that often exceed 50%. Its 8-core, 16-thread configuration, higher clocks (4.50 GHz base, 5.40 GHz boost), and 105 W TDP make it the choice for throughput-heavy tasks. The multithread score of 33,883 versus 25,047 is a 35.3% advantage that will matter in rendering, compilation, and server workloads. The single-thread lead of 3.6% is small, but it still favors the EPYC.

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D is not a general-purpose winner here, but its two victories are meaningful. In find prime numbers, it beats the EPYC by 19.9%. In physics, it wins by 35.8%, a massive margin. The 96 MB of L3 cache is the likely explanation. For workloads that are cache-resident and latency-sensitive, the Ryzen’s larger cache gives it a decisive edge. Its lower TDP (65 W) also makes it a more power-efficient option for desktop builds.

For a server or workstation, the EPYC 4364P is the obvious pick from this data. Its benchmark wins are broad and large. For a desktop user running physics simulations or prime-number workloads, the Ryzen 5 7500X3D is the better match. The choice hinges on whether the workload benefits from more cores and higher clocks (EPYC) or more cache and lower power (Ryzen).

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 4364P wins in data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, floating point math, integer math, multithread, random string sorting, and single-thread tests. These are the standard measures of compute throughput and general productivity. The EPYC’s 50.3% lead in data compression and 53% lead in encryption show it handles data-heavy tasks with clear superiority. The 52.3% edge in integer math and 53.6% in floating point math make it the pick for scientific computing, video encoding, and any workload that scales with core count.

The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D wins in find prime numbers (19.9% ahead) and physics (35.8% ahead). These are cache-sensitive, latency-bound workloads where the 96 MB L3 cache provides a tangible benefit. The physics score of 2,779 versus 1,785 is the standout result, suggesting that simulation and physics-based applications will run noticeably better on the Ryzen. The prime number result, while smaller in margin, confirms the cache advantage.

In practical terms, the EPYC 4364P is the better choice for multi-core, multi-threaded environments, server virtualization, and content creation. The Ryzen 5 7500X3D suits desktop users who prioritize physics-heavy games or applications that fit within its large L3 cache. The overall average benchmark scores reflect this: the EPYC’s 45,970 is about 3.1% higher than the Ryzen’s 44,573. But the Ryzen’s wins are not trivial, and for its specific strengths, it is the clear winner.