AMD EPYC 4545P vs AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 and the AMD EPYC 4545P are both 16-core, 32-thread Zen 5 processors from the same manufacturer, yet they target completely different segments of the market. The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is a mobile part built for high-end laptops, while the EPYC 4545P is a server and workstation chip. Despite sharing core counts and architecture, the recorded benchmark data reveals a fascinating split in strengths, with the mobile chip winning 8 of the 15 head-to-head comparisons and the server chip taking 7. This page analyzes those differences using only the measured scores and recorded specifications.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD EPYC 4545P has a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 boosts to 5.10 GHz. The base clocks are identical at 3.00 GHz for both.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 and the AMD EPYC 4545P have ECC memory support enabled, as recorded in the database.

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

A: The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 uses Quad-channel LPDDR5X memory and delivers 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The EPYC 4545P uses Dual-channel DDR5 memory and provides 89.6 GB/s, which is significantly lower.

Q: Which chip has the larger cache configuration?

A: Both processors feature 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core. The L3 cache is 64 MB shared on the Ryzen AI Max+ 395, and the EPYC 4545P also has 64 MB of L3 cache.

Q: How do the two chips compare in single-core Cinebench R23 scores?

A: The EPYC 4545P scores 6646 in Cinebench R23 single-core, which is 69.2% higher than the Ryzen AI Max+ 395's score of 2044. This is the largest single-core delta in the recorded data.

Q: What are the respective market segments for these processors?

A: The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is classified as a Mobile processor, while the EPYC 4545P is classified as a Server/Workstation processor. Their sockets differ as well: the mobile chip uses AMD Socket FP11, and the server chip uses AMD Socket AM5.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the Zen 5 architecture using a 4 nm process node from TSMC, and both have a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². The fundamental core layout is the same: 16 cores and 32 threads, with identical cache hierarchies. The L1 cache is 80 KB per core, L2 is 1 MB per core, and L3 is 64 MB shared. The EPYC 4545P has a transistor count of 16,630 million, while the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 does not have a recorded transistor figure.

The key architectural distinctions lie in the surrounding platform features. The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is designed for mobile, using LPDDR5X memory over a Quad-channel interface, which yields a memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s. It also integrates Radeon 8060S graphics. The EPYC 4545P is a server part using DDR5 memory over a Dual-channel interface, resulting in a much lower memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The server chip also includes Radeon Graphics, but the memory subsystem is clearly built for capacity rather than raw bandwidth.

Another major difference is PCIe connectivity. The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the EPYC 4545P offers Gen 5 with 24 lanes (CPU only). This gives the server chip a substantial advantage in expandability and I/O throughput, which is typical for workloads involving multiple GPUs or NVMe drives. The process nodes are identical at 4 nm, and both chips come from TSMC, so the underlying transistor technology is the same.

The power envelopes differ as well. The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 has a TDP of 55 watts, while the EPYC 4545P has a TDP of 65 watts. This is a modest difference, but it reflects the mobile focus of the former and the always-plugged-in nature of the latter. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not supported on either part. The codenames are Strix Halo for the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 and Grado for the EPYC 4545P, with the latter belonging to the EPYC 4005 series.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture of two different tools for two different jobs. The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 wins 8 of the 15 head-to-head benchmarks, with notable victories in data compression, extended instructions, floating point math, and multithreaded workloads. Its 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is a massive advantage, and the integrated Radeon 8060S graphics make it a self-contained solution for a mobile workstation. The 55-watt TDP also makes it suitable for power-constrained environments.

The AMD EPYC 4545P counters with 7 wins, and its victories are decisive in single-core and multi-core rendering. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 47079 represents a 25% lead over the Ryzen AI Max+ 395, and the single-core scores are in a completely different class. The server chip also has a higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz, which directly contributes to its single-thread dominance. The EPYC 4545P is the correct choice for server racks, data centers, and workstation builds where raw compute throughput and single-thread responsiveness are paramount.

For a mobile user who needs a laptop that can handle heavy data compression, extended instruction sets, and floating point math, the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is the logical pick. Its memory bandwidth is 2.86 times higher than the EPYC 4545P, and it holds a 21.9% lead in extended instructions. For a server administrator deploying a rack of processors, the EPYC 4545P offers a higher boost clock and Gen 5 PCIe with 24 lanes, which supports faster storage and networking infrastructure. The choice comes down to platform: mobile integration versus server scalability.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several recorded specifications, despite sharing core counts and cache sizes. The boost clock is higher on the EPYC 4545P at 5.40 GHz versus 5.10 GHz on the Ryzen AI Max+ 395. The TDP is 65 watts for the EPYC 4545P and 55 watts for the Ryzen AI Max+ 395. The sockets are different: AMD Socket FP11 for the mobile chip and AMD Socket AM5 for the server chip.

Memory support is a major differentiator. The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 uses LPDDR5X over a Quad-channel bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the EPYC 4545P uses DDR5 over a Dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s. The PCIe configuration also differs: Gen 4 with 16 lanes for the mobile chip, and Gen 5 with 24 lanes for the server chip. The integrated graphics differ as well, with the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 featuring Radeon 8060S and the EPYC 4545P featuring a generic Radeon Graphics solution.

The market segments are distinct: Mobile for the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 and Server/Workstation for the EPYC 4545P. The release dates are January 5, 2025 for the mobile chip and May 12, 2025 for the server chip. The EPYC 4545P has a recorded launch MSRP of $549, while the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 has no launch MSRP recorded. The part numbers are 100-000001099 for the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 and 100-000001764 for the EPYC 4545P.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results show a clear division of labor. The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 dominates in data compression, scoring 690650 against 636279 for the EPYC 4545P, an 8.5% lead. This is likely due to its superior memory bandwidth, which allows faster data movement during compression tasks. The margin is even larger in extended instructions, where the mobile chip scores 56346 versus 46231, a 21.9% advantage. This suggests that the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is better optimized for instruction-heavy workloads like encryption and multimedia processing.

The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 also wins in floating point math, scoring 128682 versus 126505, a narrow 1.7% margin. It takes the multithreaded Passmark score as well, 54934 versus 53504, a 2.7% lead. The mobile chip wins in physics (3481 versus 3260, a 6.8% margin), random string sorting (76177 versus 73850, a 3.2% lead), and find prime numbers (303 versus 292, a 3.8% edge). These results indicate that the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is a well-rounded performer in many compute tasks, despite being a mobile part.

The EPYC 4545P, however, wins the single-core battles decisively. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 6646 versus 2044, a staggering 69.2% advantage. The same pattern holds in Cinebench R15 single-core, where it scores 669 versus 316, a 52.8% lead. This is a massive gap that reflects the higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The server chip also wins Cinebench R23 multi-core with a score of 47079 versus 35314, a 25% lead, despite losing other multithreaded benchmarks. This suggests that the EPYC 4545P is better suited for rendering workloads that scale with cache and clock speed.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 wins with 5463 versus 4745, a 15.1% margin, which contrasts with the R23 result. The EPYC 4545P takes integer math with 213485 versus 200665, a 6% lead, and data encryption with 37598 versus 35455, a 5.7% edge. The single-thread Passmark score goes to the EPYC 4545P at 4318 versus 4147, a 4% difference. The overall win count is 8 for the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 and 7 for the EPYC 4545P, but the magnitude of the EPYC's single-core wins is far larger than the margins of the Ryzen's victories.

The average benchmark scores reflect this balance. The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 has an average score of 77740, which is 1.6% above its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX. The EPYC 4545P has an average score of 75373, which is 0.2% below the Intel Core Ultra 9 285. Both processors sit at the 95th percentile of all CPUs. The data shows that the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is slightly ahead in average performance, but the EPYC 4545P offers superior single-core speed and rendering performance, making it the stronger choice for server workloads that depend on those metrics.