AMD EPYC 4484PX vs AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database pits the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX, a 16-core mobile flagship, against the AMD EPYC 4484PX, a 12-core server/workstation part. The results reveal a clear split: the EPYC dominates heavily in Cinebench and physics workloads, while the Ryzen counterattacks across a broad front of PassMark arithmetic and data-processing tests. The final tally stands at 7 wins for the Ryzen 9 7940HX and 6 wins for the EPYC 4484PX, but the magnitude of each victory tells a more nuanced story.

The most dramatic disparity appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The EPYC 4484PX scores 42,964, which is 31.6% higher than the Ryzen 9 7940HX’s 29,400. That is a decisive margin for a chip with fewer cores (12 versus 16), and it points to substantially higher sustained all-core throughput. The single-core Cinebench R23 result is even more lopsided: the EPYC scores 6,065 versus the Ryzen’s 1,807, a 70.2% gap. Such a wide single-thread delta is unusual and suggests that the EPYC’s higher base clock (4.40 GHz versus 2.40 GHz) and boost clock (5.60 GHz versus 5.20 GHz) translate into exceptional per-thread performance in this rendering workload.

PassMark physics also favors the EPYC heavily. The EPYC scores 4,938 versus the Ryzen’s 2,297, a 53.5% advantage. This workload, which stresses rigid-body dynamics and collision detection, clearly responds to the EPYC’s architectural design and clock speed. Similarly, the prime number search test shows the EPYC at 425 versus 273, a 35.8% lead. These results indicate that the EPYC’s higher clocks and likely better memory latency characteristics give it a strong edge in latency-sensitive, integer-heavy tasks.

The Ryzen 9 7940HX, however, wins decisively in floating-point and integer math throughput. In PassMark floating-point math, the Ryzen scores 121,383 versus the EPYC’s 96,446, a 25.9% advantage. The integer math test shows a similar pattern: 202,883 versus 162,993, a 24.5% lead. These are massive wins for the mobile chip, suggesting that its 16 cores and 32 threads, despite lower clocks, provide superior raw computational bandwidth for parallel arithmetic.

Data compression and encryption also fall to the Ryzen. The Ryzen scores 693,741 in data compression versus 603,371 for the EPYC, a 15% win. Data encryption shows the same 15% margin (41,974 versus 36,499). Extended instruction throughput follows suit: 51,029 versus 43,315, a 17.8% advantage. Random string sorting gives the Ryzen a 14.1% win (81,775 versus 71,642). The only narrow Ryzen victory is in PassMark multi-thread overall, where it scores 53,204 versus 50,547, a 5.3% lead. Single-thread PassMark results are close: the EPYC wins by just 4.3% (4,119 versus 3,942), which is a far smaller gap than the Cinebench single-core disparity.

Where Each One Wins

The data points to two distinct usage profiles. The EPYC 4484PX is the clear choice for workloads that reward high clock speeds and strong single-thread performance. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score is more than three times that of the Ryzen 9 7940HX, and its physics score is more than double. For rendering engines that scale poorly across cores, for simulation code with serial dependencies, or for any task where a single thread is the bottleneck, the EPYC’s 5.60 GHz boost clock and 4.40 GHz base clock deliver a substantial advantage. The 35.8% lead in prime number finding further reinforces this pattern: it is a classic latency-bound test.

The Ryzen 9 7940HX, by contrast, excels in throughput-oriented workloads that can utilize all 32 threads. Its wins in floating-point math (25.9%), integer math (24.5%), and data compression (15%) indicate that it is better suited for scientific computing, financial modeling, and data engineering tasks where parallel execution is king. The 15% encryption win also suggests it handles cryptographic workloads more efficiently, likely due to the extra cores. The Ryzen’s 5.3% multi-thread overall win, while modest, confirms that it is the stronger all-round parallel processor in this comparison.

The practical interpretation is straightforward: choose the EPYC 4484PX for single-thread-critical enterprise software, physics simulation, or any workload that responds to raw clock speed. Choose the Ryzen 9 7940HX for multi-threaded number crunching, data compression pipelines, or encryption-heavy services. The 13 head-to-head benchmarks show no single winner across all categories, which makes the choice workload-dependent rather than absolute.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on TSMC’s 5 nm process and use AMD’s Zen 4 architecture, but they diverge significantly in implementation. The Ryzen 9 7940HX belongs to the Dragon Range codename, a mobile-oriented design, while the EPYC 4484PX uses the Raphael codename, which is shared with desktop and workstation parts. Both use a dual-chiplet design with a die size of 2x 71 mm², but the transistor counts differ: the Ryzen packs 13,140 million transistors, while the EPYC has 17,840 million. This difference is notable because the EPYC has fewer cores (12 versus 16) yet more transistors, which is explained by its larger L3 cache.

The cache hierarchy is a major differentiator. Both have 64 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core. The Ryzen 9 7940HX has 64 MB of L3 cache. The EPYC 4484PX, however, has 128 MB of shared L3 cache, and it includes a dedicated 1x 64MB 3D V-Cache slice. This is a significant architectural feature: the 3D V-Cache adds a massive amount of on-die memory that can dramatically improve performance in cache-sensitive workloads, though the benchmark data here shows mixed results. The EPYC’s larger cache likely contributes to its strong Cinebench and physics scores, but the Ryzen’s higher core count compensates in other areas.

Another key difference is the integrated graphics. The Ryzen 9 7940HX features a Radeon 610M iGPU, while the EPYC 4484PX ships with a generic Radeon Graphics solution. For a server/workstation part, the EPYC’s iGPU is likely minimal, whereas the mobile Ryzen may rely on its iGPU for display output in laptops. Memory support is identical on paper: both support DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 83.2 GB/s bandwidth. However, the EPYC 4484PX supports ECC memory, while the Ryzen 9 7940HX does not. This is a critical distinction for server reliability and data integrity, as ECC can correct single-bit memory errors. PCIe connectivity is also identical: Gen 5 with 28 lanes (CPU only) for both.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal several concrete differences beyond the benchmarks. The Ryzen 9 7940HX has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the EPYC 4484PX has 12 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks are starkly different: the Ryzen runs at 2.40 GHz, the EPYC at 4.40 GHz. Boost clocks are closer, but the EPYC still leads at 5.60 GHz versus 5.20 GHz. The TDP figures are far apart: the Ryzen is rated at 55 W, suitable for mobile thermals, while the EPYC consumes 120 W, typical for a server part.

The sockets differ: the Ryzen uses AMD Socket FL1 (mobile), while the EPYC uses AMD Socket AM5 (desktop/server). The Ryzen 9 7940HX has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the EPYC 4484PX is locked. The production status is Active for both, but release dates differ: the Ryzen launched on 2024-01-16, while the EPYC followed on 2024-05-20. The EPYC 4484PX has a launch MSRP of $599, while the Ryzen 9 7940HX does not have a listed launch MSRP in the database. The market segments are clearly delineated: Mobile for the Ryzen, Server/Workstation for the EPYC. The part numbers are 100-000001486 for the Ryzen and 100-000001482 for the EPYC.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core Cinebench R23 score?

A: The AMD EPYC 4484PX scores 6,065, which is 70.2% higher than the Ryzen 9 7940HX’s 1,807.

Q: Does the Ryzen 9 7940HX win any multi-core benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins PassMark multi-thread with a score of 53,204 versus 50,547 for the EPYC, a 5.3% margin.

Q: Why does the EPYC 4484PX have more transistors despite fewer cores?

A: The EPYC has 17,840 million transistors versus 13,140 million for the Ryzen, largely because it includes 128 MB of L3 cache and a 1x 64MB 3D V-Cache slice.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Ryzen 9 7940HX is rated at 55 W, while the EPYC 4484PX is rated at 120 W.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The EPYC 4484PX supports ECC memory; the Ryzen 9 7940HX does not.

Q: How do the PassMark single-thread scores compare?

A: The EPYC 4484PX scores 4,119 versus 3,942 for the Ryzen, a 4.3% advantage for the EPYC.