AMD EPYC 4564P vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus Comparison

The AMD EPYC 4564P and Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus are both 96th-percentile processors, yet they achieve that status through fundamentally different strategies. The EPYC 4564P, a server/workstation part built on Zen 4, leverages high clock speeds and a large shared cache, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, a desktop chip with a hybrid core layout, counters with raw core count and raw throughput in specific heavy workloads. The data shows a split decision: 11 benchmark wins for the Intel part versus 6 for the AMD, but the margins on the AMD side are often massive, making the choice entirely dependent on the workload.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus establishes its dominance in multithreaded productivity and physics-based simulations. It wins the Cinebench R15 and R20 multicore tests with scores of 6656 and 24461, respectively, against the AMD's 5603 and 23348. The gap extends into PassMark's multithread score, where Intel's 68574 beats AMD's 64357, and the physics test, where Intel's 4064 outpaces AMD's 3392 by 16.5%. The Intel chip also crushes AMD in floating-point math (229491 vs 141017, a 38.6% lead) and integer-heavy prime number finding (615 vs 365, a 40.7% lead). This pattern points to a processor that excels when all cores are hammering away at parallel tasks that require substantial math throughput.

The AMD EPYC 4564P, conversely, wins where cache capacity and single-thread efficiency matter most. Its most dramatic victories come in single-core tests: Cinebench R15 single-core (791 vs 354, a 123.4% lead) and Cinebench R23 single-core (7848 vs 2439, a staggering 221.8% lead). It also takes Cinebench R23 multicore (55592 vs 44253, a 25.6% win), despite losing the older R15 and R20 multicore tests. In PassMark, AMD wins integer math (228761 vs 175986, a 30% lead), data compression (858105 vs 804322, a 6.7% lead), and random string sorting (103202 vs 96945, a 6.5% lead). These results suggest a processor that thrives on cached data, repetitive integer operations, and memory-bound sorting tasks, rather than sheer floating-point brute force.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge sharply in their underlying design philosophies. The AMD EPYC 4564P is built on TSMC's 5 nm node with 13,140 million transistors spread across a 2x 71 mm² die. It features 16 cores and 32 threads on the Zen 4 architecture, with a base clock of 4.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.70 GHz. Its cache hierarchy is distinctive: 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a substantial 64 MB of shared L3 cache. This large L3 pool is likely a key factor in its data compression and string sorting victories, as more data can reside on-chip. It uses dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, supports ECC, and provides 28 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. It also includes integrated Radeon Graphics, which is unusual for a server part. The EPYC is not multiplier-unlocked and carries a launch MSRP of $699.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is a different beast entirely. It uses a 3 nm TSMC process with 17,800 million transistors on a single 243 mm² die. It offers 24 cores and 24 threads (no hyperthreading), with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. Its cache configuration is more generous per core: 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 per core, but its shared L3 is only 36 MB. This smaller L3 pool may explain its losses in cache-sensitive tests like data compression. The Intel part supports dual-channel DDR5 with a higher memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, also supports ECC, but offers fewer PCIe lanes at 20 Gen 5 lanes. It includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU for integrated graphics. The Core Ultra 7 is multiplier-unlocked, allowing overclocking, and has a launch MSRP of $299. The Intel chip also has a lower TDP of 125 watts versus AMD's 170 watts, despite having more cores.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the entire dataset is Cinebench R23 single-core, where the AMD EPYC 4564P scores 7848 against Intel's 2439. This 221.8% delta is extraordinary and suggests a fundamental difference in how each chip handles single-threaded bursts. The EPYC's 5.70 GHz boost clock appears to give it a massive advantage in this specific workload, whereas the Core Ultra 7's 5.50 GHz boost cannot compensate for its architecture's lower single-thread throughput in this test. The R15 single-core test tells a similar story, with AMD leading 791 to 354 (a 123.4% advantage), solidifying the EPYC's position as the clear winner for lightly threaded tasks.

However, the Intel chip fights back decisively in other areas. In Cinebench R15 multicore, Intel wins 6656 to 5603, a 15.8% margin. Its PassMark floating-point math score of 229491 is 38.6% higher than AMD's 141017, illustrating a clear advantage in scientific and graphics workloads that rely on FPU execution. The find-prime-numbers test further emphasizes this, with Intel's 615 crushing AMD's 365 (a 40.7% lead). For users running physics simulations or encryption workloads, Intel's 4064 physics score and 59097 encryption score (vs AMD's 3392 and 50708, respectively) demonstrate a 16.5% and 14.2% lead. The Intel chip also wins the overall PassMark multithread test (68574 vs 64357) and the single-thread test (5068 vs 4292), showing balanced superiority in the PassMark suite.

The AMD EPYC's victories are narrower in some cases but decisive in others. Beyond the single-core Cinebench wins, its 25.6% lead in Cinebench R23 multicore (55592 vs 44253) is notable because it reverses the Intel wins in R15 and R20 multicore. This suggests the AMD chip scales better as the workload duration increases, possibly due to its 64 MB L3 cache. Its 30% lead in PassMark integer math (228761 vs 175986) indicates strong ALU performance, and its wins in data compression (6.7%) and random string sorting (6.5%) point to efficient memory access patterns. The extended instructions test is essentially a tie, with Intel winning by a negligible 0.6% (63506 vs 63136).

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in single-core performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 4564P wins decisively in single-core tests. It beats the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus by 123.4% in Cinebench R15 single-core (791 vs 354) and by 221.8% in Cinebench R23 single-core (7848 vs 2439). However, the Intel chip wins PassMark's single-thread test with a score of 5068 versus AMD's 4292.

Q: How do they compare in multithreaded workloads?

A: The results are mixed. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus wins Cinebench R15 multicore (6656 vs 5603) and R20 multicore (24461 vs 23348), plus PassMark multithread (68574 vs 64357). The AMD EPYC 4564P wins the more demanding Cinebench R23 multicore test with a 25.6% margin (55592 vs 44253).

Q: Which processor offers more PCIe lanes?

A: The AMD EPYC 4564P offers 28 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus provides 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only). This gives the AMD part more headroom for expansion cards and NVMe storage.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has a higher memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s compared to the AMD EPYC 4564P's 83.2 GB/s. Both support DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, and both support ECC memory.

Q: Are these processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. The AMD EPYC 4564P has a locked multiplier, meaning it cannot be overclocked. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, however, has an unlocked multiplier, allowing users to overclock the CPU.

Q: Which chip has more L3 cache?

A: The AMD EPYC 4564P has a significantly larger shared L3 cache at 64 MB, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD chip also has smaller per-core L1 and L2 caches (64 KB and 1 MB) compared to Intel's 192 KB and 3 MB per core.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for different user profiles. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the choice for users who prioritize raw computational throughput in floating-point-heavy and physics-based applications. Its wins in PassMark floating-point math (229491 vs 141017), find-prime-numbers (615 vs 365), and the physics test (4064 vs 3392) show a decisive edge in scientific computing, financial modeling, and rendering tasks that rely on FPU performance. Its higher memory bandwidth (115.2 GB/s vs 83.2 GB/s) and lower TDP (125W vs 170W) make it a more efficient choice for sustained parallel workloads. The unlocked multiplier and lower launch MSRP of $299 also make it attractive for enthusiasts who want to push performance further.

The AMD EPYC 4564P, with its launch MSRP of $699, is positioned for a different audience. Its enormous lead in single-core Cinebench tests (123.4% and 221.8%) makes it a superior choice for legacy single-threaded applications, database work, or any environment where per-core speed is critical. Its 64 MB L3 cache and wins in integer math (228761 vs 175986), data compression (858105 vs 804322), and random string sorting (103202 vs 96945) point to strengths in data analytics, caching, and file server roles. The 28 PCIe Gen 5 lanes also provide more expansion capability for workstation users with multiple GPUs or high-speed storage arrays. For server or workstation deployments where single-thread latency and cache capacity drive performance, the EPYC 4564P is the data-backed winner, despite its higher price and locked multiplier.