AMD EPYC 4584PX vs AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher overall benchmark average?

A: The AMD EPYC 4584PX records an average benchmark score of 83090, while the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P averages 76492. The 4584PX sits at the 96th percentile among all CPUs, compared to the 95th percentile for the 8224P.

Q: How large is the single-thread performance gap between the two?

A: In PassMark single-thread testing, the EPYC 4584PX scores 3795 versus 2357 for the EPYC Embedded 8224P, a 61% advantage. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a similar pattern: 7274 against 5864, a 24% lead.

Q: Does the EPYC Embedded 8224P win any benchmark categories?

A: No. Across all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, the EPYC 4584PX wins every single test. The 8224P does not record a single victory in the recorded data.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The EPYC 4584PX has 16 cores and 32 threads. The EPYC Embedded 8224P has 24 cores and 48 threads, meaning the embedded part offers more physical cores but still trails in performance.

Q: How do the memory systems differ?

A: The EPYC 4584PX uses dual-channel DDR5 with 83.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The EPYC Embedded 8224P uses six-channel DDR5 with 230.4 GB/s, a substantially wider memory pipe.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The EPYC 4584PX boosts to 5.70 GHz, while the EPYC Embedded 8224P boosts to 3.00 GHz. The base clocks are 4.20 GHz and 2.55 GHz respectively.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different EPYC families and target different design philosophies. The AMD EPYC 4584PX belongs to the EPYC 4004 series, built on the Zen 4 architecture with the Raphael codename. The AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P belongs to the EPYC 8004 series, using Zen 4c with the Siena codename. Both are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, but the transistor counts differ slightly: 17,840 million for the 4584PX versus 17,750 million for the 8224P. Die sizes are also close, with the 4584PX using 2x 71 mm² and the 8224P using 2x 73 mm².

The cache layouts diverge significantly. Both share 64 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core. The L3 cache, however, tells a different story: the EPYC 4584PX has 128 MB of shared L3 plus a 64 MB 3D V-Cache slice, while the EPYC Embedded 8224P has only 64 MB of shared L3 and no V-Cache. This extra cache likely explains much of the 4584PX's performance advantage in latency-sensitive workloads.

Socket and platform choices also differ. The 4584PX uses AMD Socket AM5, while the 8224P uses AMD Socket SP6. The 4584PX offers 28 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, while the 8224P provides 96 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. The 8224P also integrates no graphics, whereas the 4584PX includes Radeon Graphics. Both support DDR5 memory and ECC, but the memory channels differ (dual-channel versus six-channel). The 4584PX was released on 2024-05-20, while the 8224P came earlier on 2023-09-17.

The 4584PX carries a launch MSRP of $699. The 8224P has no recorded launch MSRP in the database. Both parts remain active in production, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the EPYC 4584PX wins all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The largest margins appear in single-threaded and prime-number workloads. PassMark single-thread shows the 4584PX at 3795 versus 2357, a 61% advantage. PassMark find prime numbers shows 441 against 286, a 54.2% lead. These results point to a massive per-core performance difference, driven by the much higher clocks (5.70 GHz boost versus 3.00 GHz) and the larger cache hierarchy.

Cinebench results cluster tightly around a 24% advantage across the board. R15 multicore: 5193 against 4187, a 24% delta. R15 singlecore: 733 versus 590, 24.2%. R20 multicore: 21640 against 17447, 24%. R20 singlecore: 3055 versus 2462, 24.1%. R23 multicore: 51524 against 41542, 24%. R23 singlecore: 7274 versus 5864, 24%. The consistency of these deltas suggests a uniform architectural advantage rather than workload-specific quirks.

PassMark workloads show more varied margins. Data compression favors the 4584PX by 8.8% (741648 versus 681754). Data encryption shows a 5.2% edge (45902 versus 43619). Extended instructions give 16.7% (53774 versus 46091). Floating point math is nearly tied at 1.2% (121460 versus 120066). Integer math gives 4.5% (201919 versus 193256). Multithread gives 18.9% (58117 versus 48873). Physics gives 11.3% (4574 versus 4110). Random string sorting gives 2.6% (87690 versus 85505).

The smallest deltas appear in floating point math and random string sorting, where the 8224P's extra cores and six-channel memory bandwidth help close the gap. But even there, the 4584PX holds the lead. The overall picture is clear: the 4584PX delivers superior performance in every measured category, often by a wide margin.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. Core count: 16 cores for the 4584PX versus 24 cores for the 8224P. Threads: 32 versus 48. Base clock: 4.20 GHz versus 2.55 GHz. Boost clock: 5.70 GHz versus 3.00 GHz. TDP: 120 watts versus 160 watts. Socket: AM5 versus SP6. Architecture: Zen 4 versus Zen 4c. Codename: Raphael versus Siena.

Cache: the 4584PX has 128 MB shared L3 plus a 64 MB 3D V-Cache slice, while the 8224P has 64 MB shared L3 and no V-Cache. Memory bus: dual-channel versus six-channel. Memory bandwidth: 83.2 GB/s versus 230.4 GB/s. PCIe lanes: 28 versus 96, both Gen 5. Integrated graphics: Radeon Graphics versus none. Release date: 2024-05-20 versus 2023-09-17. Launch MSRP: $699 versus no recorded value. Transistors: 17,840 million versus 17,750 million. Die size: 2x 71 mm² versus 2x 73 mm².

The 8224P brings more cores, more memory bandwidth, more PCIe lanes, and a higher TDP. The 4584PX brings higher clocks, more L3 cache, and integrated graphics. These are fundamentally different trade-offs, and the benchmark results show which set of choices wins in raw performance.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance winner: the AMD EPYC 4584PX. It wins all 17 head-to-head benchmarks, holds a 96th percentile ranking versus the 8224P's 95th, and averages 83090 against 76492. The 4584PX leads by 61% in single-thread PassMark, 54.2% in prime-number finding, and a consistent 24% across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. The embedded part's higher core count and six-channel memory bandwidth do not translate into any recorded benchmark victory.

For workloads that depend on single-thread speed, cache sensitivity, or general compute throughput, the 4584PX is the stronger choice. The 8224P, however, offers 96 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, six-channel DDR5 with 230.4 GB/s bandwidth, and a higher TDP envelope of 160 watts. Those specifications suggest a platform designed for I/O-heavy embedded applications rather than raw compute. The 4584PX, with its 28 PCIe lanes and 83.2 GB/s bandwidth, targets a different deployment profile.

The verdict from the recorded data: if the goal is maximum compute performance per socket, the EPYC 4584PX wins decisively. If the goal is maximum memory bandwidth and PCIe expansion, the EPYC Embedded 8224P offers those features, though at the cost of benchmark performance. The 4584PX also carries a $699 launch MSRP, while the 8224P has no recorded price.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 4584PX wins in every measured performance category. It excels in single-threaded workloads by 61%, in prime-number computation by 54.2%, and in extended instructions by 16.7%. Cinebench multicore tests show a 24% advantage, indicating that even with half the cores, the 4584PX outperforms the 24-core 8224P in rendering-style parallel workloads. Data compression, encryption, integer math, physics, and multithread tests all favor the 4584PX by margins ranging from 4.5% to 18.9%. The smallest edges are in floating point math (1.2%) and random string sorting (2.6%), where the 8224P's additional cores and memory bandwidth nearly close the gap.

The EPYC Embedded 8224P wins in platform specification categories, not benchmark tests. It offers six-channel memory versus dual-channel, delivering 230.4 GB/s against 83.2 GB/s. It provides 96 PCIe Gen 5 lanes versus 28, making it better suited for systems requiring extensive I/O expansion. It has 24 cores and 48 threads, which may appeal to software that scales with core count, even though the benchmark data shows the 4584PX still wins in multithreaded tests. The 8224P also draws more power with a 160 watt TDP, suggesting it is designed for embedded deployments where compute density matters less than connectivity.

The PassMark data compression score of 681754 for the 8224P comes close to the 4584PX's 741648, a gap of only 8.8%. Floating point math shows a nearly identical 120066 against 121460. These are the areas where the 8224P's strengths nearly overcome the 4584PX's clock and cache advantages. In embedded settings that prioritize memory bandwidth for data movement rather than raw compute, the 8224P's architecture has a clear rationale, even if the recorded benchmarks do not show a win.