AMD EPYC 4464P vs AMD EPYC 9124 Comparison

The AMD EPYC 9124 and AMD EPYC 4464P represent two distinct philosophies within AMD's server lineup, both built on the Zen 4 architecture but targeting different operational envelopes. The 9124 is a 16-core, 32-thread Genoa part designed for the scalable SP5 platform, while the 4464P is a 12-core, 24-thread Raphael part aimed at the AM5 socket. Benchmark data reveals a surprisingly competitive landscape, with the 4464P securing 13 wins across the head-to-head suite against 4 wins for the 9124, despite the latter holding a higher average benchmark score of 65104 compared to 64756.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is in single-thread performance, where the EPYC 4464P dominates. In the Passmark single-thread test, the 4464P scores 4130, a full 34.2% ahead of the 9124’s 2719. This gap is a direct consequence of the 4464P’s higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz versus the 9124’s 3.70 GHz, and it carries over to Cinebench single-core tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the 4464P’s 5677 score eclipses the 9124’s 5261, a 7.3% advantage that is consistent across all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 single-core runs.

Multi-core performance tells a more nuanced story. Despite having 16 cores to the 4464P’s 12, the 9124 loses every Cinebench multicore test. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the 4464P scores 40215 against the 9124’s 37269, again a 7.3% deficit for the higher-core-count part. The pattern repeats in Cinebench R15 and R20 multicore, where the 4464P leads by the same 7.3%. The Passmark multithread test confirms this, with the 4464P posting 47312 versus 43846 for the 9124, a 7.3% margin. This suggests that the 4464P’s substantial clock speed advantage more than compensates for its two fewer cores in these heavily threaded workloads.

However, the 9124 fights back in specific computational tasks. Its most significant victory is in Passmark physics, where it scores 3662 against the 4464P’s 2879, a commanding 27.2% lead. The 9124 also wins Passmark extended instructions, scoring 43380 versus 38866, an 11.6% advantage. Data compression and random string sorting also favor the 9124, with scores of 599417 and 74177 respectively, representing leads of 4.2% and 5.3% over the 4464P’s 575076 and 70443. These wins indicate that the 9124’s larger core count and memory bandwidth can still provide tangible benefits in specific instruction-heavy or memory-latency-sensitive workloads.

The remaining head-to-head tests are closer. In Passmark data encryption, the 4464P edges out a 0.4% win, scoring 36227 to the 9124’s 36078. Floating-point math goes to the 4464P by 5%, with scores of 91668 versus 87057, and integer math follows with a 7% lead for the 4464P, posting 160011 against 148785. The 4464P also wins Passmark find prime numbers by a substantial 21.7%, scoring 327 versus 256, indicating a strong performance in this specific single-threaded algorithmic test.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the Zen 4 architecture at TSMC’s 5 nm process node, but they are fundamentally different silicon designs. The EPYC 9124, codenamed Genoa, is a multi-chiplet design featuring a die size of 4x 72 mm² and a transistor count of 26,280 million. The EPYC 4464P, codenamed Raphael, uses a smaller die configuration of 2x 71 mm² and contains 13,140 million transistors. This difference in physical design directly impacts the platform and features available to each processor.

The most critical architectural divergence is the memory bus. The 9124 supports a twelve-channel memory bus, providing a theoretical memory bandwidth of 460.8 GB/s. The 4464P is limited to a dual-channel bus, with a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. This 5.5x difference in memory bandwidth explains why the 9124 excels in memory-intensive benchmarks like Passmark data compression and random string sorting, where the ability to feed data to the cores quickly is paramount. Both support DDR5 memory and ECC, but the sheer channel count gives the 9124 a massive throughput advantage.

PCIe connectivity also differs significantly. The 9124 offers 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), while the 4464P provides 28 lanes of Gen 5. This makes the 9124 suitable for systems with numerous high-speed expansion cards, GPUs, or NVMe storage devices, whereas the 4464P is constrained to more modest expansion configurations. The 4464P does include integrated Radeon Graphics, a feature absent from the 9124, which relies on a discrete GPU for display output.

Cache topology is similar in per-core allocation, with both offering 64 KB of L1 cache and 1 MB of L2 cache per core. The shared L3 cache is also identical at 64 MB, though the physical implementation differs between the chiplet designs. The base and boost clocks are where the specifications diverge sharply. The 4464P has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, while the 9124 has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. This 1.7 GHz difference in boost clock is the primary driver of the 4464P’s single-thread and multicore Cinebench victories.

Thermal design power is another major differentiator. The 9124 has a TDP of 200 watts, while the 4464P is rated at just 65 watts. This reflects the 9124’s higher core count and memory controllers, but also means it requires more substantial cooling and power delivery infrastructure. The 9124 is built for AMD Socket SP5, while the 4464P uses the mainstream AMD Socket AM5, which further emphasizes their different target platforms.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-thread performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 4464P is significantly faster in single-thread workloads. Its Passmark single-thread score of 4130 is 34.2% higher than the EPYC 9124’s 2719. This advantage is consistent across Cinebench single-core tests, where the 4464P leads by 7.3% in R15, R20, and R23.

Q: Does the EPYC 9124’s higher core count result in better multicore performance?

A: No, benchmark data shows the opposite. Despite having 16 cores versus the 4464P’s 12, the 9124 trails by 7.3% in all Cinebench multicore tests and in the Passmark multithread test. The 4464P’s higher clock speeds offset its lower core count in these workloads.

Q: In which benchmarks does the EPYC 9124 outperform the EPYC 4464P?

A: The 9124 wins in Passmark physics with a 27.2% lead, extended instructions with an 11.6% lead, data compression with a 4.2% lead, and random string sorting with a 5.3% lead. These are the four tests where the 9124’s architecture provides a clear benefit.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two?

A: The EPYC 9124 supports a twelve-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 460.8 GB/s, while the EPYC 4464P has a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. This difference is substantial and contributes to the 9124’s advantage in memory-intensive workloads.

Q: Are both processors built on the same process node?

A: Yes, both the EPYC 9124 and the EPYC 4464P are fabricated on the 5 nm process node by TSMC. They also share the same Zen 4 architecture, though they are different physical designs with different die sizes and transistor counts.

Q: Do these processors have the same socket and platform requirements?

A: No, they are incompatible. The EPYC 9124 uses AMD Socket SP5, while the EPYC 4464P uses AMD Socket AM5. They also differ in PCIe lane counts, with the 9124 offering 128 lanes and the 4464P offering 28 lanes, both Gen 5.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split in workload suitability. The AMD EPYC 4464P is the superior choice for general-purpose server and workstation tasks that are sensitive to clock speed and single-thread performance. Its dominance in all Cinebench tests, Passmark integer and floating-point math, and the single-thread test by margins of up to 34.2% makes it the more responsive processor for most software. The 7.3% lead in Cinebench R23 multicore, despite having fewer cores, is particularly compelling for applications that are not heavily memory-bandwidth dependent.

The AMD EPYC 9124 justifies its existence in scenarios that demand maximum memory throughput and specific instruction sets. Its 27.2% win in Passmark physics and 11.6% win in extended instructions, combined with 4.2% and 5.3% leads in data compression and random string sorting, point to workloads that benefit from its twelve-channel memory bus and higher core count. The 9124’s massive 460.8 GB/s memory bandwidth versus the 4464P’s 83.2 GB/s is the key differentiator here.

For a system builder prioritizing raw per-core speed, low power consumption at 65 watts, and a mainstream AM5 platform, the 4464P is the data-backed winner. For workloads that are memory-bound or rely on the extended instruction set, the 9124’s 200-watt SP5 platform provides the necessary infrastructure. The 4464P wins the majority of the head-to-head tests, but the 9124’s victories are in categories that often matter most for high-performance computing and large-scale data processing.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD EPYC 9124 | AMD EPYC 4464P |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Cores | 16 | 12 |

| Threads | 32 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.70 GHz | 5.40 GHz |

| TDP | 200 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP5 | AMD Socket AM5 |

| Codename | Genoa | Raphael |

| Transistors | 26,280 million | 13,140 million |

| Die Size | 4x 72 mm² | 2x 71 mm² |

| Memory Bus | Twelve-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 460.8 GB/s | 83.2 GB/s |

| PCIe Lanes | Gen 5, 128 Lanes | Gen 5, 28 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Radeon Graphics |

| Launch MSRP | $1083 | $429 |

| Release Date | 2022-11-09 | 2024-05-20 |

| Part Number | 100-100000802 | 100-000001478 |