AMD EPYC 4464P vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus Comparison

The AMD EPYC 4464P and Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus land in the same overall performance tier, both sitting in the 93rd percentile against all CPUs in the database, but they arrive there through very different routes. The EPYC 4464P is a 12-core, 24-thread server/workstation part on Socket AM5 with ECC support, while the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is a 20-core, 20-thread mobile chip built on a denser node. Across the recorded head-to-head tests the Intel part wins 13 of 17 contests, yet the margins tell a more nuanced story: Intel owns the consistent four-point wins in Cinebench and a large floating-point advantage, while AMD dominates integer-heavy and memory-bound workloads by double digits.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite is a clean sweep for Intel, and the margins are remarkably uniform. In R15 the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus scores 4224 multi-core and 596 single-core against the EPYC's 4053 and 572, a 4% gap both ways. R20 repeats the pattern at 17603 versus 16890 multi-core and 2485 versus 2384 single-core, both 4.1% in Intel's favor. R23 extends it slightly: 41913 to 40215 multi-core and 5917 to 5677 single-core, again 4.1%. Rendering, in short, favors Intel across the board by a small but stable margin.

The PassMark suite is where the split personality emerges. Intel's biggest win is floating point math, where 163567 crushes the EPYC's 93090, a 43.1% difference. Prime number finding goes to Intel at 482 versus 343, a 28.8% gap, and physics follows at 3843 versus 2873, 25.2% in Intel's favor. Single-thread performance is also clearly Intel's: 4764 to 4146, a 13% advantage, and data encryption lands 37813 to 35816, 5.3% to Intel. The overall PassMark multithread score is nearly a tie, 48270 to 47514, just 1.6% apart.

AMD's wins are concentrated but substantial. Integer math goes to the EPYC 160410 to 122449, a 31% lead. Data compression is a 16.4% win at 574304 versus 493179. Random string sorting favors AMD 70200 to 60020, 17%. Extended instructions is effectively dead even, with AMD ahead by 0.2% at 39359 versus 39283. The pattern is clear: anything integer-driven or compression-like belongs to AMD, anything floating-point or per-thread belongs to Intel.

Architecture Differences

These are fundamentally different designs. The EPYC 4464P uses AMD's Zen 4 architecture, codename Raphael, built on TSMC's 5 nm process with 13,140 million transistors across a 2x 71 mm² die configuration. It runs 12 cores and 24 threads with simultaneous multithreading, a 3.70 GHz base clock and a 5.40 GHz boost, within a 65 W TDP envelope. Cache is generous: 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and a large 64 MB shared L3.

The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is an Arrow Lake-HX Refresh mobile part on TSMC's 3 nm node, packing 17,800 million transistors into a single 243 mm² die. It runs 20 cores and 20 threads, no SMT, with a lower 2.40 GHz base clock, a 5.30 GHz top boost, and a 55 W TDP. Its per-core cache allotment is larger, 192 KB L1 and 3 MB L2, but shared L3 is half the EPYC's at 30 MB.

Platform capabilities diverge sharply. Both support DDR5 on a dual-channel bus, but Intel's memory bandwidth is higher at 102.4 GB/s versus 83.2 GB/s. The EPYC counters with ECC memory support, which Intel lacks, and more PCIe connectivity: Gen 5 with 28 CPU lanes against Intel's 20. Intel integrates Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 EUs; the EPYC ships with basic Radeon Graphics. The EPYC has a locked multiplier; the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is multiplier-unlocked. Their sockets are incompatible classes entirely, AM5 versus Intel BGA 2114, reflecting server/workstation versus mobile segmentation.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split. Buyers who need rendering throughput, single-thread responsiveness, physics simulation, or floating-point compute should pick the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus: it wins every Cinebench test by about 4%, single-thread by 13%, floating point by 43.1%, and physics by 25.2%, all at a slightly lower TDP of 55 W versus 65 W.

Buyers running integer-heavy server workloads, compression pipelines, or string processing should pick the EPYC 4464P, which leads integer math by 31%, compression by 16.4%, and sorting by 17%. The EPYC also brings platform features the Intel chip cannot match: ECC memory, 28 Gen 5 PCIe lanes versus 20, and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz versus 5.30 GHz. Its launch MSRP was $429. For sustained workstation duty with data integrity requirements, the EPYC's feature set is decisive; for raw per-thread and floating-point speed, Intel wins on the numbers.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core? A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus, scoring 41913 versus 40215 for the EPYC 4464P, a 4.1% advantage.

Q: Which CPU is better at integer math? A: The AMD EPYC 4464P, by a wide margin: 160410 versus 122449 in PassMark integer math, a 31% lead.

Q: Which has better single-thread performance? A: Intel, scoring 4764 versus 4146 in PassMark single-thread, a 13% advantage, consistent with its Cinebench single-core wins.

Q: Do both CPUs support ECC memory? A: No. The EPYC 4464P supports ECC; the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus does not.

Q: Which CPU has more cores? A: The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 20 cores, while the EPYC 4464P has 12 cores. However, the EPYC runs 24 threads via SMT while the Intel part runs 20 threads.

Q: Which CPU has more cache? A: The EPYC 4464P has 64 MB shared L3 versus Intel's 30 MB, but Intel has larger per-core cache with 192 KB L1 and 3 MB L2 per core versus AMD's 64 KB and 1 MB.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus wins rendering workloads (all six Cinebench results by 4% to 4.1%), physics simulation (3843 versus 2873), prime number computation (482 versus 343), floating point math (163567 versus 93090), encryption (37813 versus 35816), and overall multithread throughput (48270 versus 47514). It is the choice for 3D rendering, simulation, and any workload that leans on per-core speed, helped by its higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s and stronger integrated Arc Xe-LPG graphics.

The EPYC 4464P wins integer math (160410 versus 122449), data compression (574304 versus 493179), and string sorting (70200 versus 60020), and ties on extended instructions. It is the choice for database-style processing, archival compression, and text manipulation workloads. Its 28 Gen 5 PCIe lanes and ECC support make it better suited to storage-dense servers and workstations where data integrity matters, and its unlockable-free AM5 platform targets exactly that segment.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD EPYC 4464P | Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus |

|---|---|---|

| Series | EPYC 4004 series | Core Ultra Series 2 |

| Cores / Threads | 12 / 24 | 20 / 20 |

| Base Clock | 3.70 GHz | 2.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.40 GHz | 5.30 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 55 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel BGA 2114 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 (Raphael) | Arrow Lake-HX Refresh |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 3 nm |

| Transistors | 13,140 million | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | 2x 71 mm² | 243 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB per core | 192 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB per core | 3 MB per core |

| L3 Cache | 64 MB shared | 30 MB shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 28 lanes | Gen 5, 20 lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon Graphics | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2024-05-20 | 2026-03-16 |

| Launch MSRP | $429 | Not available |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | 100-000001478 | SADST |