AMD EPYC 4564P vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split between the AMD EPYC 4564P and the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a classic study in workload specialization. Across the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, the AMD EPYC 4564P claims 12 wins, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus takes 5. The AMD part dominates in heavily parallel, integer-heavy, and data-processing tasks, while the Intel part counters in single-threaded responsiveness, floating-point throughput, and certain encryption workloads.

The AMD EPYC 4564P is the clear choice for server and workstation workloads that stress multi-core rendering, compression, sorting, and general integer math. Its wins in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 across both single-core and multi-core tests, combined with decisive margins in data compression, extended instructions, integer math, multithread, physics, and random string sorting, paint a picture of a processor built for sustained throughput on mixed server tasks. The 7.5% lead in every Cinebench iteration, both single and multi-core, is remarkably consistent, suggesting a fundamental architectural advantage in these rendering workloads rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus, by contrast, establishes its territory in floating-point math and single-threaded responsiveness. Its 34.3% lead in floating-point math and 11% edge in single-thread Passmark tests are substantial. The 27.4% advantage in find prime numbers and 3.5% lead in data encryption round out a profile that suits scientific computing, financial modeling, and applications where one or two cores carry the load. The Intel part also wins in Passmark single-thread and singlethread tests, which are recorded separately but yield identical scores of 4823 for both.

The distribution of wins is not subtle. The AMD EPYC 4564P wins by double digits in data compression (22.9%), extended instructions (20.6%), integer math (37.6%), and random string sorting (29.4%). The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus wins by double digits only in floating-point math (34.3%) and find prime numbers (27.4%). The AMD processor's largest win, 37.6% in integer math, is larger than any single Intel margin, and the AMD processor wins more tests overall. The average benchmark score in the database reflects this: the AMD EPYC 4564P sits at 95183, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus sits at 84003, a difference of roughly 11,000 points.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD EPYC 4564P is built on TSMC's 5 nm process with Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Raphael. It packs 16 cores and 32 threads, a configuration that relies on simultaneous multithreading to double thread count. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus uses TSMC's 3 nm process with Arrow Lake Refresh architecture and offers 24 cores and 24 threads, meaning it does not use hyper-threading at all. The Intel part has more physical cores, but the AMD part matches it in thread count due to SMT.

The transistor counts differ accordingly. The AMD EPYC 4564P contains 13,140 million transistors across a die size of 2x 71 mm², while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus packs 17,800 million transistors into a single 243 mm² die. The Intel part's larger transistor budget and smaller process node give it a denser design, but the AMD part's dual-chiplet layout suggests a different approach to scalability and thermal management.

Cache hierarchies diverge sharply. The AMD EPYC 4564P allocates 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, but only 36 MB of shared L3. The AMD processor's 64 MB of L3 is nearly double the Intel part's 36 MB, a factor that likely contributes to its strong showing in data compression and random string sorting, where large working sets benefit from larger caches.

Clock speeds are closely matched at the top end. The AMD EPYC 4564P has a base clock of 4.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.70 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has a lower base clock of 3.70 GHz but a slightly higher boost clock of 5.80 GHz. The AMD part's higher base clock gives it an advantage in sustained all-core workloads, while the Intel part's higher boost clock helps in bursty single-threaded scenarios.

Both processors support DDR5 memory with dual-channel buses, but the bandwidth figures differ. The AMD EPYC 4564P offers 83.2 GB/s, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus offers 115.2 GB/s. Both support ECC memory, which is notable for the Intel part since it is classified as a desktop processor. PCIe connectivity also differs: the AMD EPYC 4564P provides Gen 5 with 28 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes.

The AMD EPYC 4564P is a server and workstation part with a launch MSRP of $699, released on 2024-05-20. It is not multiplier unlocked. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a desktop part with no recorded release date or launch MSRP in the database, and it is multiplier unlocked. Both processors feature integrated graphics: the AMD part includes Radeon Graphics, while the Intel part includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite delivers a clean sweep for the AMD EPYC 4564P with a uniform 7.5% margin across all six tests. In Cinebench R15, the AMD part scores 5603 multi-core versus 5214 for the Intel part, and 791 single-core versus 736. In R20, the AMD part scores 23348 multi-core versus 21727, and 3296 single-core versus 3067. In R23, the AMD part scores 55592 multi-core versus 51731, and 7848 single-core versus 7303. The consistency of the 7.5% delta across both single and multi-core tests indicates that the AMD architecture holds a steady per-thread advantage in Cinebench workloads, not merely a thread-count advantage.

The Passmark suite tells a more complex story. In data compression, the AMD EPYC 4564P wins decisively with 858105 versus 698346, a 22.9% margin. Extended instructions go to AMD with 63136 versus 52338, a 20.6% lead. Integer math is the AMD processor's largest victory: 228761 versus 166194, a 37.6% advantage. Random string sorting also favors AMD heavily: 103202 versus 79744, a 29.4% margin. Multithread performance goes to AMD with 64357 versus 60860, a 5.7% lead, and physics shows a narrow AMD win at 3392 versus 3315, a 2.3% margin.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus counters in specific areas. Floating-point math is its strongest result: 214760 versus 141017, a 34.3% lead. Find prime numbers goes to Intel with 503 versus 365, a 27.4% margin. Data encryption shows a modest Intel win at 52563 versus 50708, a 3.5% edge. Single-thread performance goes to Intel with 4823 versus 4292, an 11% advantage, and the identical singlethread test confirms the same result.

The overall benchmark averages in the database position the AMD EPYC 4564P at 95183, which places it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 9175F at 95615 with a -0.5% delta, the AMD EPYC 4565P at 95764 with a -0.6% delta, the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 9945 at 96083 with a -0.9% delta, and the Intel Xeon 6520P at 93786 with a 1.5% delta. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus holds an average benchmark score of 84003, also in the 96th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K at 83807 with a 0.2% delta, the AMD EPYC 4584PX at 83090 with a 1.1% delta, the AMD EPYC 9135 at 82980 with a 1.2% delta, and the AMD EPYC 7F72 at 85072 with a -1.3% delta.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench rendering tests?

A: The AMD EPYC 4564P wins all six Cinebench tests, both single-core and multi-core, with a consistent 7.5% margin over the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus in every iteration.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus have any clear advantages?

A: Yes. It leads by 34.3% in floating-point math, 27.4% in find prime numbers, 11% in single-thread performance, and 3.5% in data encryption.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The AMD EPYC 4564P has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. The AMD part uses simultaneous multithreading to double its thread count, while the Intel part does not.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The AMD EPYC 4564P has 64 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to 36 MB for the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures?

A: The AMD EPYC 4564P offers 83.2 GB/s, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus offers 115.2 GB/s. Both support DDR5 and ECC memory.

Q: How do the processors compare in the database's overall average?

A: The AMD EPYC 4564P has an average benchmark score of 95183, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has an average of 84003. Both sit in the 96th percentile of all CPUs.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on workload. The AMD EPYC 4564P is the superior processor for multi-threaded server and workstation tasks, rendering workloads, data compression, integer math, and sorting operations. Its 37.6% lead in integer math and 29.4% lead in random string sorting are the largest margins recorded in this comparison, and its consistent 7.5% edge across the entire Cinebench suite makes it the default choice for content creation and 3D rendering. The 64 MB of L3 cache and 32 threads give it a structural advantage in heavily parallel, data-intensive workloads.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is the better pick for floating-point heavy scientific workloads, prime number computations, and single-threaded applications where its 11% single-thread advantage and 34.3% floating-point lead matter most. Its higher memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s and larger transistor budget on the 3 nm node also make it attractive for memory-bound desktop tasks. The unlocked multiplier on the Intel part offers tuning headroom that the locked AMD part does not.

For a server or workstation deployment where rendering, compression, and integer throughput dominate, the AMD EPYC 4564P wins on the strength of 12 benchmark victories and a higher average score. For a desktop build focused on floating-point math, encryption, and single-threaded responsiveness, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus justifies consideration despite its lower overall average. The recorded data favors the AMD EPYC 4564P for general-purpose throughput, but the Intel part's specialized wins are substantial enough to matter in the right context.