AMD EPYC 4465P vs AMD EPYC 9124 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clear overall winner in the AMD EPYC 4465P, which takes 12 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests. However, the results are not one-sided. The AMD EPYC 9124 claims five wins, and those victories cluster around specific workloads that favor its larger core count and platform design.

The most dramatic gap appears in single-thread performance. In PassMark single-thread testing, the EPYC 4465P scores 4575 against 2719 for the EPYC 9124, a 68.3% advantage. This is the largest delta in either direction across all recorded benchmarks. The Cinebench single-core results reinforce the same story: the 4465P leads by 15.1% in Cinebench R15 single-core (610 vs 530) and by 15.2% in both Cinebench R20 and R23 single-core (2544 vs 2209, and 6059 vs 5261 respectively). The 4465P's boost clock of 5.40 GHz against 3.70 GHz for the 9124 explains this pattern.

Multi-threaded rendering workloads tell a consistent narrative as well. Cinebench R15 multicore sees the 4465P ahead by 4326 vs 3756, a 15.2% advantage. Cinebench R20 multicore shows the same 15.2% delta (18025 vs 15652), and Cinebench R23 multicore repeats the exact same 15.2% margin with 42918 vs 37269. This consistency across all three Cinebench versions indicates a stable architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific anomaly.

The math-oriented PassMark tests also swing heavily toward the 4465P. Floating point math scores 105833 vs 87057, a 21.6% lead. Integer math shows a 17.3% edge at 174551 vs 148785. Prime number finding produces the second-largest percentage win for the 4465P: 338 vs 256, a 32% margin. PassMark multithread overall lands at 49871 vs 43846, a 13.7% advantage for the 4465P.

The EPYC 9124's wins are narrower but meaningful. Data compression goes to the 9124 at 599417 vs 577210, a 3.7% edge. Random string sorting favors the 9124 by 8.9% (74177 vs 67597). Data encryption shows the largest 9124 victory at 36078 vs 32184, a 10.8% margin. Extended instructions are nearly tied, with the 9124 ahead by just 1.2% (43380 vs 42867). Physics testing is the closest recorded result: 3662 vs 3647, a 0.4% win for the 9124.

The average benchmark scores reflect the overall balance. The 4465P posts an average benchmark score of 66925 across all recorded tests, while the 9124 averages 65104. Both processors sit at the 93rd percentile against all CPUs in the database. The 4465P's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus at 66855 (0.1% behind), the Intel Xeon 6515P at 67006 (0.1% ahead), the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX at 67469 (0.8% ahead), and the Intel Xeon w5-3525 at 67673 (1.1% ahead). The 9124's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 4464P at 64823 (0.4% behind), the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 at 64640 (0.7% behind), the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F at 64438 (1% behind), and the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D at 65914 (1.2% ahead).

The single-thread delta of 68.3% is the headline number. No other comparison in the head-to-head dataset comes close to that magnitude. The 32% prime number win and the 21.6% floating point win are also substantial. The 9124's largest win, 10.8% in encryption, is comparatively modest.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 4465P wins every recorded single-core test. PassMark single-thread shows 4575 vs 2719, a 68.3% advantage. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 single-core all show a 15.1% or 15.2% lead for the 4465P.

Q: How do the two compare in multi-threaded Cinebench scores?

A: The EPYC 4465P leads by 15.2% across all three Cinebench multicore tests. Scores are 4326 vs 3756 in R15, 18025 vs 15652 in R20, and 42918 vs 37269 in R23.

Q: In which benchmarks does the EPYC 9124 outperform the EPYC 4465P?

A: The 9124 wins data compression (599417 vs 577210), data encryption (36078 vs 32184), extended instructions (43380 vs 42867), random string sorting (74177 vs 67597), and physics (3662 vs 3647).

Q: What is the largest performance gap between these two processors?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark single-thread testing, where the EPYC 4465P scores 4575 against 2719 for the EPYC 9124, a 68.3% advantage.

Q: How close are the average benchmark scores?

A: The EPYC 4465P averages 66925 across all recorded benchmarks, while the EPYC 9124 averages 65104. Both sit at the 93rd percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmark tests?

A: The EPYC 4465P wins 12 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests. The EPYC 9124 wins the remaining five.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 4465P is the choice for workloads that depend on raw single-thread speed and high-frequency execution. The 68.3% PassMark single-thread lead and the 15.2% Cinebench single-core margins make it the stronger option for lightly threaded server tasks, interactive workloads, and any application where per-core responsiveness matters more than aggregate throughput. The floating point math advantage of 21.6% and the integer math advantage of 17.3% point toward scientific computing and number-crunching tasks that scale with execution efficiency rather than core count. The 32% lead in prime number finding reinforces this pattern.

The EPYC 9124 is better suited for memory-bandwidth-sensitive and data-movement-heavy operations. Its wins in data compression (3.7%), random string sorting (8.9%), and data encryption (10.8%) all involve moving or transforming large volumes of data. The 9124's twelve-channel memory bus and 460.8 GB/s bandwidth against the 4465P's dual-channel 89.6 GB/s figure explain these results. The extended instructions win, while narrow at 1.2%, also suggests an edge in specialized instruction-heavy code paths.

For general multi-threaded throughput, the 4465P holds the advantage despite having fewer cores. Its 13.7% PassMark multithread lead and 15.2% Cinebench multicore margins show that the Zen 5 architecture's per-core efficiency overcomes the 9124's 16-core vs 12-core count. Physics testing is essentially a tie at 0.4% in favor of the 9124, so physics simulation workloads are unlikely to see a meaningful difference.

The data suggests a clear split: choose the 4465P for frequency-driven, latency-sensitive, and math-heavy workloads. Choose the 9124 when memory throughput or large-scale data manipulation dominates the workload profile.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. The EPYC 4465P is a 12-core, 24-thread part with a base clock of 3.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The EPYC 9124 is a 16-core, 32-thread part with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. The 4465P has a TDP of 65 watts, while the 9124 is rated at 200 watts.

Socket and platform requirements are entirely different. The 4465P uses AMD Socket AM5, while the 9124 uses AMD Socket SP5. Memory support also diverges sharply: the 4465P runs dual-channel DDR5 with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, and the 9124 runs twelve-channel DDR5 with 460.8 GB/s bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the 4465P provides Gen 5 with 24 CPU lanes, while the 9124 provides Gen 5 with 128 CPU lanes.

The 4465P includes integrated Radeon Graphics, while the 9124 has no integrated graphics. The 4465P has a launch MSRP of $399, and the 9124 has a launch MSRP of $1083. Release dates differ: the 4465P was released on 2025-05-12, and the 9124 was released on 2022-11-09. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is substantial. The EPYC 4465P belongs to the EPYC 4005 series, uses the Zen 5 architecture with the Grado codename, and is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The EPYC 9124 belongs to the EPYC 9004 series, uses the Zen 4 architecture with the Genoa codename, and is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC.

Transistor counts and die layouts differ significantly. The 4465P contains 16,630 million transistors across a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². The 9124 contains 26,280 million transistors across a die size of 4x 72 mm². The 9124's additional compute dies and higher transistor count support its larger core inventory.

Cache hierarchies are similar in L3 capacity but differ in L1. Both processors share 64 MB of L3 cache and 1 MB of L2 per core. The 4465P has 80 KB of L1 per core, while the 9124 has 64 KB of L1 per core. Neither processor features 3D V-Cache. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The generation gap between Zen 5 and Zen 4, combined with the 4 nm vs 5 nm process difference, drives the 4465P's per-core efficiency advantage. The 4465P's higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz against 3.70 GHz is the most visible expression of this architectural lead. The 9124's twelve-channel memory controller and 128 PCIe lanes represent the platform-level advantages of the SP5 socket design.

The Verdict

The AMD EPYC 4465P is the better processor for the majority of workloads recorded in the database. It wins 12 of 17 head-to-head tests, including every Cinebench benchmark and the most important PassMark throughput metrics. The 68.3% single-thread lead is decisive for any application that cannot fully utilize many cores. The 15.2% multicore Cinebench advantage across all three versions shows that its 12 cores outperform the 9124's 16 cores in rendering and similarly threaded workloads. The 21.6% floating point, 17.3% integer math, and 32% prime number wins make it the stronger choice for compute-heavy tasks.

The AMD EPYC 9124 remains the better option for specific data-intensive workloads. Its wins in data compression, encryption, random string sorting, and extended instructions all trace back to its twelve-channel memory subsystem and 460.8 GB/s bandwidth. The 10.8% encryption lead and 8.9% random string sorting lead are the largest 9124 victories. For workloads that shuffle large datasets or depend heavily on memory throughput, the 9124's platform provides a measurable benefit.

The 9124 also offers more cores, threads, and PCIe lanes, with 16 cores and 32 threads against 12 and 24, plus 128 Gen 5 lanes against 24. The 4465P counters with a 65 watt TDP against 200 watts, a 5.40 GHz boost clock against 3.70 GHz, and integrated graphics that the 9124 lacks. The 4465P also carries a launch MSRP of $399 against $1083 for the 9124.

The verdict depends on workload profile. Select the EPYC 4465P for general server and workstation use, rendering, scientific math, and any environment where per-core speed and energy efficiency are priorities. Select the EPYC 9124 when memory bandwidth, data compression, encryption, or high lane-count PCIe expansion are the dominant requirements. The benchmark data does not support a blanket recommendation for the 9124, but it clearly identifies the specific niches where the older processor remains competitive.