AMD EPYC 4464P vs AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD EPYC 4464P is the clear performance victor in this comparison. Across all 11 head-to-head benchmark tests, the EPYC 4464P records a higher score, with wins ranging from a modest 4.2% in single-threaded workloads to a commanding 165.9% in prime number finding. The data shows a decisive margin in favor of the EPYC 4464P, which also holds a higher average benchmark score of 64,823 compared to the Ryzen AI Embedded P185's 62,839. Both processors sit at the 93rd percentile against all CPUs, meaning they are in the same overall performance tier, but the EPYC 4464P consistently reaches higher peaks.

The Ryzen AI Embedded P185 is not without its merits, but they are not found in raw compute benchmarks. Its 28 TDP rating is a fraction of the EPYC 4464P's 65 TDP, and it includes the Radeon 890M integrated graphics, which is a more capable iGPU than the EPYC 4464P's standard Radeon Graphics. For a compact embedded system with modest power delivery and integrated graphics requirements, the P185 is the sensible pick. For any workload where processing throughput matters most, the EPYC 4464P is the only choice from this data. Server and workstation users should opt for the EPYC 4464P; embedded and mobile-focused designs that prioritize low power consumption should lean on the Ryzen AI Embedded P185.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The AMD EPYC 4464P is significantly faster. In the PassMark multithread test, it scores 47,514 versus the Ryzen AI Embedded P185's 31,817, a 49.3% advantage. The EPYC 4464P also wins the Cinebench R23 multicore test with 40,215 points, though no direct comparison score exists for the P185 in that test.

Q: How do the two chips compare in single-threaded performance?

A: The EPYC 4464P leads by a narrow margin. In the PassMark single-thread test, the EPYC 4464P scores 4,146 while the Ryzen AI Embedded P185 scores 3,977, a 4.2% difference. This is the closest head-to-head result between the two processors.

Q: Is the Ryzen AI Embedded P185 more power-efficient?

A: Yes, the recorded TDP values indicate a major difference. The Ryzen AI Embedded P185 has a 28 TDP rating, while the AMD EPYC 4464P has a 65 TDP rating. The P185 consumes less than half the thermal design power, making it substantially more suitable for power-constrained embedded environments.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD EPYC 4464P and the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 support ECC memory. Both also support DDR5 memory, though the P185 additionally supports LPDDR5X, which the EPYC 4464P does not list.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest delta is in the PassMark find prime numbers test. The EPYC 4464P scores 343, while the Ryzen AI Embedded P185 scores 129, giving the EPYC 4464P a 165.9% lead. This suggests a substantial advantage in integer-heavy, algorithmically intensive workloads.

Q: Which processor has better integrated graphics?

A: The Ryzen AI Embedded P185 features the Radeon 890M integrated graphics, while the AMD EPYC 4464P features the standard Radeon Graphics. Based on the naming and positioning, the P185's iGPU is the more advanced part, though no benchmark data for graphics performance is available in the database.

Architecture Differences

The AMD EPYC 4464P is built on the Zen 4 architecture with the Raphael codename, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Ryzen AI Embedded P185 uses a newer hybrid design with the Gorgon Point codename, combining Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores on a 4 nm TSMC process. This is a notable architectural divide: the EPYC 4464P is a monolithic server-class chip based on the Raphael design, while the P185 is an embedded processor that mixes high-performance Zen 5 cores with dense Zen 5c cores to balance throughput and efficiency.

The cache hierarchies differ substantially. The EPYC 4464P allocates 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core, with a shared 64 MB L3 cache. The Ryzen AI Embedded P185 provides 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, but its shared L3 cache is only 16 MB. The EPYC 4464P's larger L3 cache is a critical advantage for workloads that repeatedly access large datasets, and it helps explain the wide margins in memory-sensitive tasks.

The physical implementation also diverges. The EPYC 4464P uses a dual-die design with a 2x 71 mm² footprint, totaling 142 mm² of silicon, and integrates 13,140 million transistors. The Ryzen AI Embedded P185 uses a single 233 mm² die with no listed transistor count. The EPYC 4464P is built for AMD Socket AM5, while the P185 uses AMD Socket FP8, which is a mobile and embedded form factor. Both are actively produced and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

The two processors share a core count of 12 cores and 24 threads, but almost every other specification diverges. The EPYC 4464P has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The Ryzen AI Embedded P185 has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The EPYC 4464P's base clock is 85% higher, which is a decisive factor in sustained all-core workloads.

The TDP ratings are starkly different: the EPYC 4464P is rated at 65 W, while the P185 is rated at 28 W. This reflects their intended deployment scenarios. The EPYC 4464P targets server and workstation environments with active cooling, while the P185 is designed for mobile and embedded systems with limited thermal budgets.

Memory support also differs. The EPYC 4464P supports DDR5 memory with dual-channel configuration and a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The P185 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, with a slightly higher memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Both support ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity is another differentiator. The EPYC 4464P offers PCIe Gen 5 with 28 lanes (CPU only), while the P185 offers PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). This gives the EPYC 4464P both a newer PCIe generation and nearly double the lane count, which is essential for high-bandwidth expansion cards and storage arrays.

Integrated graphics separate the two as well. The EPYC 4464P includes Radeon Graphics, whereas the P185 includes the Radeon 890M. The EPYC 4464P's launch MSRP is $429. The P185 has no listed launch MSRP. The EPYC 4464P was released on 2024-05-20, while the P185 has a later release date of 2026-02-28.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD EPYC 4464P wins all 11 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The most decisive victory comes in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where the EPYC 4464P scores 343 against the P185's 129, a 165.9% advantage. This result underscores the EPYC 4464P's strength in algorithmic integer processing, likely driven by its higher base clock and larger cache.

In data encryption, the EPYC 4464P posts 35,816 points versus 19,612 for the P185, an 82.6% lead. This is a critical metric for server workloads that handle sensitive data. Random string sorting also shows a significant gap: the EPYC 4464P scores 70,200 compared to 40,557, a 73.1% difference, indicating faster memory access and data movement.

The physics benchmark favors the EPYC 4464P by 62.1%, with scores of 2,873 and 1,772. Data compression yields a 53.4% margin, with the EPYC 4464P at 574,304 and the P185 at 374,429. The multithread score shows a 49.3% gap: 47,514 versus 31,817. Extended instructions follow at 48.3%, with 39,359 versus 26,544. Integer math produces a 36.1% lead, with 160,410 versus 117,832, and floating-point math shows a 31.9% advantage, with 93,090 versus 70,587.

The closest contest is in single-threaded performance. The EPYC 4464P scores 4,146, and the P185 scores 3,977, a 4.2% difference. This narrow margin shows that the P185's Zen 5 cores are individually competitive, but the EPYC 4464P still edges ahead in raw single-core throughput.

Looking at the broader benchmark averages, the EPYC 4464P has an average score of 64,823, which places it 0.3% behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 265, 0.4% ahead of the AMD EPYC 9124, 0.6% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F, and 1% ahead of the AMD EPYC 7343. The P185 averages 62,839, sitting 0.2% behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX, 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core i7-13790F, 0.5% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX, and 0.5% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 PRO 465. Both chips are competitive within their respective peer groups, but the EPYC 4464P's absolute scores are consistently higher across every workload category.