AMD EPYC 4565P vs AMD EPYC 7513 Comparison
AMD EPYC 4565P
EPYC 7513
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: AMD EPYC 4565P vs AMD EPYC 7513
The AMD EPYC 7513 and AMD EPYC 4565P represent two very different approaches to server processing, separated by four years of architectural evolution and targeting distinct workload profiles. The 7513 is a 32-core Zen 3 Milan part with massive memory bandwidth, while the 4565P is a 16-core Zen 5 Grado chip with dramatically higher clock speeds. Benchmark data shows the 4565P wins 11 of 17 head-to-head tests, yet the 7513 takes decisive victories in several specialized workloads, making the choice highly dependent on application requirements.
Where Each One Wins
The AMD EPYC 4565P dominates in general-purpose and single-threaded performance. Its single-core scores are substantially higher across every benchmark, with the PassMark single-thread test showing a 47.4% advantage (4712 vs 2479). This carries into multi-threaded rendering workloads, where the 4565P leads in all three Cinebench versions: R15 multicore (5484 vs 5083), R20 multicore (22850 vs 21181), and R23 multicore (54405 vs 50431), each with a consistent 7.3% margin. The 4565P also wins PassMark multithread (63474 vs 59331, 6.5% ahead) and extended instructions (64345 vs 56451, 12.3% ahead), plus a marginal floating-point win (152003 vs 151713, just 0.2% ahead).
The AMD EPYC 7513, despite losing the overall test count, wins in specific throughput-oriented tasks. Its most striking victory is in PassMark physics, scoring 5118 against 2976 — a 72% advantage. It also leads decisively in data encryption (63628 vs 48268, 31.8% ahead), find prime numbers (380 vs 294, 29.3% ahead), and random string sorting (104660 vs 81318, 28.7% ahead). Data compression (932240 vs 860786, 8.3% ahead) and integer math (272145 vs 250683, 8.6% ahead) also favor the 7513.
Architecture Differences
The two processors embody different generations of AMD server design. The EPYC 7513 uses the Zen 3 architecture on a 7 nm TSMC process, with a Milan codename and 33,200 million transistors spread across eight chiplets, each 81 mm². It features 32 cores and 64 threads with a 2.60 GHz base clock and 3.65 GHz boost clock. Cache configuration includes 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 128 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR4 over an eight-channel bus, delivering 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, with 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes.
The EPYC 4565P uses the newer Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with a Grado codename and 16,630 million transistors across two chiplets, each 70.6 mm². It has 16 cores and 32 threads but runs at much higher clocks: 4.30 GHz base and 5.70 GHz boost. Cache is larger per core — 80 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 — but total L3 is halved at 64 MB shared. Memory moves to DDR5 on a dual-channel bus, yielding only 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, and PCIe is Gen 5 with just 24 lanes. The 4565P also integrates Radeon Graphics, while the 7513 has no integrated graphics.
These differences explain the benchmark results. The 7513’s eight-channel memory and 128 MB L3 give it advantages in memory-latency-sensitive and bandwidth-heavy tasks like encryption, compression, and sorting. The 4565P’s higher clocks and newer IPC make it faster in single-threaded and lightly-threaded workloads, while its dual-channel DDR5 limits memory throughput compared to the 7513’s octa-channel DDR4.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The single-thread gap is the largest in the dataset. PassMark single-thread shows the 4565P at 4712 versus the 7513’s 2479, a 47.4% delta. Cinebench single-core scores tell a similar story: R15 single (774 vs 717, 7.4%), R20 single (3225 vs 2989, 7.3%), and R23 single (7680 vs 7119, 7.3%) all favor the 4565P by roughly the same margin. This consistency suggests the 4565P’s clock advantage translates uniformly across rendering engines.
Multi-threaded Cinebench results also favor the 4565P, despite the 7513 having twice as many cores. The 4565P leads R15 multicore by 7.3%, R20 multicore by 7.3%, and R23 multicore by 7.3% — the identical delta to single-core results. This indicates that the 7513’s core-count advantage is fully offset by the 4565P’s per-core performance, resulting in a net wash where the 4565P still edges ahead. PassMark multithread shows a smaller 6.5% win for the 4565P (63474 vs 59331).
The 7513’s wins are concentrated in tasks where memory bandwidth or large cache matters. PassMark physics shows a 72% delta (5118 vs 2976), the largest of any test. Data encryption shows 31.8% (63628 vs 48268), find prime numbers 29.3% (380 vs 294), and random string sorting 28.7% (104660 vs 81318). These are substantial margins, not marginal differences. Data compression (8.3%) and integer math (8.6%) are more moderate wins. The only near-tie is floating-point math, where the 4565P wins by 0.2% (152003 vs 151713), effectively a statistical dead heat.
FAQ
Q: Which processor has higher single-thread performance?
A: The AMD EPYC 4565P wins every single-thread benchmark. PassMark single-thread shows 4712 vs 2479 (47.4% ahead), while Cinebench R23 single-core is 7680 vs 7119 (7.3% ahead).
Q: Does the 32-core EPYC 7513 beat the 16-core 4565P in multi-threaded workloads?
A: No, the 4565P wins all three Cinebench multicore tests (R15: 5484 vs 5083, R20: 22850 vs 21181, R23: 54405 vs 50431) and PassMark multithread (63474 vs 59331), despite having half the cores.
Q: Where does the EPYC 7513 have its biggest advantage?
A: PassMark physics shows the largest win at 72% (5118 vs 2976). Data encryption (31.8%), find prime numbers (29.3%), and random string sorting (28.7%) are also decisive 7513 wins.
Q: What explains the 7513’s wins in encryption and compression?
A: The 7513 has 128 MB shared L3 cache and 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth from its eight-channel DDR4 bus, compared to 64 MB L3 and 89.6 GB/s dual-channel DDR5 on the 4565P.
Q: Are there any near-ties in the benchmark data?
A: PassMark floating-point math is essentially tied, with the 4565P winning by just 0.2% (152003 vs 151713). All other tests have at least a 6.5% delta.
Q: Which processor has a higher base clock?
A: The EPYC 4565P runs at 4.30 GHz base and 5.70 GHz boost, versus 2.60 GHz base and 3.65 GHz boost on the EPYC 7513.
Specification Differences
The processors differ in almost every key specification. Core count: 32 vs 16. Threads: 64 vs 32. Base clock: 2.60 GHz vs 4.30 GHz. Boost clock: 3.65 GHz vs 5.70 GHz. TDP: 200 W vs 170 W. Socket: SP3 vs AM5. Architecture: Zen 3 vs Zen 5. Codename: Milan vs Grado. Process node: 7 nm vs 4 nm. Transistors: 33,200 million vs 16,630 million. Die size: 8x 81 mm² vs 2x 70.6 mm². L1 cache: 64 KB vs 80 KB per core. L2 cache: 512 KB vs 1 MB per core. L3 cache: 128 MB vs 64 MB shared. Memory support: DDR4 vs DDR5. Memory bus: eight-channel vs dual-channel. Memory bandwidth: 204.8 GB/s vs 89.6 GB/s. PCIe: Gen 4 with 128 lanes vs Gen 5 with 24 lanes. Integrated graphics: none vs Radeon Graphics. Launch MSRP: $2840 vs $589. Release dates: 2021-03-14 vs 2025-05-12.
The Verdict
The benchmark data paints a clear picture: the AMD EPYC 4565P is the superior general-purpose processor, winning 11 of 17 tests including all Cinebench multicore and single-core benchmarks, PassMark multithread, extended instructions, and single-thread performance. Its 47.4% lead in PassMark single-thread and consistent 7.3% advantages in Cinebench make it the obvious choice for workloads that prioritize clock speed and modern IPC, such as database queries, compilation, or any latency-sensitive server application. The 4565P achieves this with half the cores and lower TDP (170 W vs 200 W), plus a smaller launch MSRP.
However, the AMD EPYC 7513 is not obsolete. Its 72% win in PassMark physics, 31.8% in data encryption, and 28.7% in random string sorting indicate that tasks heavily dependent on memory bandwidth or large cache still favor this older chip. The 7513’s 128 MB L3 and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth are double the 4565P’s 64 MB and 89.6 GB/s, and its eight-channel memory controller provides a structural advantage that clock speed cannot overcome. For workloads like scientific simulation, large-scale data encryption, or in-memory analytics that saturate memory channels, the 7513 remains the stronger choice despite its age.
The choice ultimately reduces to workload type. The 4565P is the better all-rounder and wins in most standard server benchmarks, making it the default recommendation for mixed workloads. The 7513 is a specialized tool for memory-bandwidth-bound applications, where its losses in general benchmarks are irrelevant. The 4565P’s higher percentile ranking (96 vs 97 for the 7513) is close, but the delta in head-to-head results shows the 4565P’s wins are more frequent and often larger in magnitude. For new deployments, the 4565P’s combination of higher performance, lower TDP, and newer platform makes it the rational pick unless the specific workload profile matches the 7513’s strengths.