AMD EPYC 4364P vs Intel Core i9-13950HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data reveals a fascinating split between these two processors. The Intel Core i9-13950HX takes the majority of the wins, but the AMD EPYC 4364P secures some of the most dramatic victories, particularly in single-core workloads.

Starting with the Cinebench suite, the results are contradictory. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Intel part dominates with a score of 4529 against the AMD's 2982, a 34.2% deficit for the EPYC. The R20 multicore test shows a similar story: Intel scores 14462 versus 12427, a 14.1% lead. Yet Cinebench R23 multicore flips the script entirely. Here, the AMD EPYC 4364P scores 29589 against Intel's 28681, a 3.2% win for the server chip. This reversal between R20 and R23 is curious; it suggests the two processors scale differently as the workload persists or changes in memory access patterns.

The single-core numbers are where the EPYC 4364P truly shines. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the AMD part scores 420 versus Intel's 297, a massive 41.4% advantage. The R23 single-core result is even more lopsided: AMD scores 4177 against Intel's 2096, a 99.3% delta, meaning the EPYC nearly doubles the Intel chip in this test. The R20 single-core test is the exception, where Intel wins 2041 to 1754, a 14.1% margin. This inconsistency across Cinebench versions is puzzling. The R23 single-core number is so far out of line with the R15 and R20 results that it warrants scrutiny, but the database records it as measured.

Moving to the Passmark suite, Intel's multi-threaded prowess is evident. The floating point math test shows Intel at 105553 versus AMD's 66946, a 36.6% gap. Integer math follows with Intel at 147091 against 107775, a 26.7% lead. The multithread test gives Intel 41614 versus 33883, an 18.6% margin. Physics simulation also favors Intel heavily: 2668 versus 1785, a 33.1% difference.

Data compression and encryption are Intel wins as well. The compression score is 510258 for Intel versus 408220 for AMD, a 20% gap. Encryption shows Intel at 30805 against 24174, a 21.5% lead. Random string sorting goes to Intel at 57274 versus 48344, a 15.6% edge. Even the single-thread Passmark test, which might be expected to favor AMD given the Cinebench results, goes to Intel: 3899 versus 3619, a 7.2% margin.

The AMD EPYC 4364P does secure wins in Passmark extended instructions, scoring 31605 versus 29779, a 6.1% advantage. And in find prime numbers, Intel wins but only narrowly in relative terms: 203 versus 177, a 12.8% gap.

The overall score comparison places the AMD part at an average benchmark score of 45970 with an 89th percentile standing among all CPUs. The Intel part averages 44342, sitting at the 88th percentile. This is a razor-thin overall difference; the AMD chip is just 3.7% higher in average score, despite losing most head-to-head tests. The reason is clear: AMD's enormous single-core Cinebench R23 result lifts its average disproportionately. The nearest rivals for the AMD part include the AMD EPYC 7303 at 45960 (0% delta) and the Intel Core i7-14700HX at 45953 (0% delta), confirming the EPYC 4364P sits in a tightly contested performance tier. For Intel, the nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 at 44309 (0.1% delta), showing the i9-13950HX is equally closely matched to its competition.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for different use cases. If the workload is heavily multi-threaded, particularly involving floating point math, integer operations, encryption, or compression, the Intel Core i9-13950HX is the stronger choice. Its 24 cores and 32 threads provide a substantial parallel throughput advantage that shows up in the Passmark multithread, floating point, and integer tests, where it leads by margins between 18.6% and 36.6%.

If the workload is single-threaded and sensitive to clock speed per core, the AMD EPYC 4364P is surprisingly competitive, at least in the Cinebench R15 and R23 single-core tests. The 99.3% lead in R23 single-core is the single largest delta in the entire comparison. However, the Passmark single-thread test contradicts this, giving Intel a 7.2% edge. The R20 single-core test also favors Intel. This inconsistency means a buyer should look at which specific benchmark suite matches their actual application.

The more consistent story is in Cinebench R23 multicore, where AMD wins 29589 to 28681. This is the only multicore test AMD wins, and it is notable because R23 is a longer, more sustained workload than R15 or R20. For prolonged all-core rendering tasks, the EPYC 4364P may hold up better than the shorter tests suggest.

Given the market segments, the data supports the obvious positioning: the EPYC 4364P is a server and workstation part, while the i9-13950HX is a mobile processor. For a server chassis running sustained single-threaded database queries or lightly threaded services, the EPYC's single-core Cinebench results are compelling. For a mobile workstation running heavy parallel simulations, the i9-13950HX's Passmark multithread and floating point leads are the deciding factor.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 4364P wins in four recorded head-to-head tests. Two are single-core Cinebench tests (R15 and R23), one is Cinebench R23 multicore, and one is Passmark extended instructions. The extended instructions win, 31605 versus 29779, suggests the Zen 4 architecture has a slight edge in specialized vector or crypto instruction throughput. The R23 multicore win is the most significant for server workloads, as it represents sustained all-core performance in a modern rendering benchmark.

The Intel Core i9-13950HX wins the remaining thirteen comparisons. Its strongest areas are floating point math (36.6% lead), Cinebench R15 multicore (34.2% lead), physics simulation (33.1% lead), and integer math (26.7% lead). These are classic compute-heavy parallel workloads. The Intel part also wins both Passmark single-thread tests, data compression, encryption, and random string sorting, indicating broad superiority in general productivity and data manipulation tasks.

For a system integrator building a high-core-count mobile workstation, the Intel part is the clear pick. For a rack server running many lightly threaded virtual machines or containers where single-core latency matters, the AMD part's Cinebench single-core numbers make it attractive. The fact that the EPYC 4364P has a lower TDP of 105 watts versus Intel's 55 watts is counterintuitive given the Intel part is mobile, but the data does not include power efficiency metrics, so no further inference is possible.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD EPYC 4364P has an average benchmark score of 45970, while the Intel Core i9-13950HX averages 44342. The AMD part also sits at the 89th percentile among all CPUs, one point higher than Intel's 88th percentile.

Q: How does the Intel Core i9-13950HX perform in floating point math?

A: The Intel part scores 105553 in Passmark floating point math, which is 36.6% higher than the AMD EPYC 4364P's 66946. This is the largest single margin in the entire comparison.

Q: Is the AMD EPYC 4364P competitive in single-core performance?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD part scores 4177 versus Intel's 2096, a 99.3% advantage. However, in Cinebench R20 single-core, Intel wins 2041 to 1754, and in Passmark single-thread, Intel wins 3899 to 3619. The results are inconsistent across benchmark versions.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The AMD EPYC 4364P has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core i9-13950HX has 24 cores and 32 threads, three times the core count and double the thread count.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Both processors support ECC memory. The AMD EPYC 4364P supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, while the Intel Core i9-13950HX supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel.

Q: What are the release dates and launch MSRPs?

A: The AMD EPYC 4364P was released on May 20, 2024, with a launch MSRP of $399. The Intel Core i9-13950HX was released on January 3, 2023, with a launch MSRP of $590.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD EPYC 4364P uses the Zen 4 architecture with the Raphael codename, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It packs 6,570 million transistors into a 71 mm² die. The Intel Core i9-13950HX uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-HX codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel with a 257 mm² die. The node advantage for AMD is significant: a smaller process with higher transistor density.

Cache hierarchies differ notably. The AMD part provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has more per-core cache and slightly more L3 overall, which may explain its Passmark wins in data compression and sorting, workloads that benefit from larger caches.

The integrated graphics differ as well. AMD includes Radeon Graphics, while Intel includes UHD Graphics 770. The AMD part is a server and workstation segment product on the AMD Socket AM5, while the Intel part is a mobile product on Intel BGA 1964. The Intel part has an unlocked multiplier, indicating overclocking potential, while the AMD multiplier is locked. The AMD part supports PCIe Gen 5 with 28 CPU-only lanes, while the Intel part supports PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU-only lanes.

The memory support also diverges. The AMD EPYC 4364P supports only DDR5 with a measured memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The Intel Core i9-13950HX supports both DDR4 and DDR5, and the database does not record a memory bandwidth figure for it. This means the AMD part has a documented bandwidth advantage, but the Intel part offers more flexible memory compatibility.

Specification Differences

The core counts are the most obvious difference: 8 cores and 16 threads for AMD versus 24 cores and 32 threads for Intel. Base clocks are 4.50 GHz for AMD and 2.20 GHz for Intel, while boost clocks are 5.40 GHz for AMD and 5.50 GHz for Intel. The TDP differs substantially: 105 watts for AMD and 55 watts for Intel.

The process node is 5 nm for AMD and 10 nm for Intel. Transistor count is 6,570 million for AMD with a 71 mm² die size, while Intel's transistor count is not recorded and its die size is 257 mm². The sockets are AMD Socket AM5 versus Intel BGA 1964. The cache structures differ: L1 is 64 KB per core for AMD versus 80 KB per core for Intel, L2 is 1 MB per core versus 2 MB per core, and L3 is 32 MB shared versus 36 MB shared.

Memory support shows AMD limited to DDR5 while Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5. The AMD part has a recorded memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s; Intel's is not recorded. PCIe lanes differ: 28 CPU-only lanes for AMD versus 20 for Intel. The integrated graphics are Radeon Graphics for AMD and UHD Graphics 770 for Intel. The multiplier is locked on AMD and unlocked on Intel. The AMD part number is 100-000001477, and the Intel part number is SRMEB. The market segments are Server/Workstation for AMD and Mobile for Intel.