AMD EPYC 4585PX vs AMD EPYC 8324P Comparison

The AMD EPYC 8324P and AMD EPYC 4585PX are both server/workstation processors that land in the 98th percentile of all CPUs, but they take very different routes to that ranking. The 8324P is a 32-core Zen 4c part with a 3.00 GHz boost clock and a 180 W TDP, while the 4585PX is a 16-core Zen 5 chip with a 5.70 GHz boost and a 170 W TDP. Their average benchmark scores are close — 103,329 for the 8324P and 100,819 for the 4585PX — but the distribution of wins is lopsided: the 4585PX takes 14 of the 17 head-to-head tests, while the 8324P wins three specialized workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The 4585PX dominates the Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 6,093 against the 8324P’s 4,894 — a 19.7% advantage. The same 19.7% gap appears in R20 multi-core (25,389 vs 20,393) and R23 multi-core (60,451 vs 48,557). Single-core results are even more decisive: the 4585PX leads by 19.8% in R15 single-core (860 vs 690), 19.7% in R20 single-core (3,584 vs 2,879), and 19.7% in R23 single-core (8,534 vs 6,855). The PassMark single-thread test shows the biggest disparity: 4,795 for the 4585PX versus 2,367 for the 8324P, a 50.6% margin. This is not a small difference; it means the 4585PX delivers roughly twice the single-thread throughput in that specific test.

The 4585PX also wins all other PassMark CPU tests except three. In PassMark multithread, it scores 71,552 against 57,127, a 20.2% lead. Physics performance is heavily in its favor: 7,140 versus 4,637, a 35.1% gap. Find prime numbers shows a 32.5% advantage (514 vs 347), floating point math is 10.1% better (154,641 vs 139,022), integer math is 2.9% better (255,898 vs 248,447), and extended instructions are 10.8% better (67,572 vs 60,304). Across all these tests, the 4585PX’s higher clocks and newer architecture overcome the 8324P’s core-count advantage.

The 8324P’s three wins are in data compression, encryption, and random string sorting. Data compression: 980,907 versus 893,899, a 9.7% lead. Encryption: 63,195 versus 49,374, a 28% lead. Random string sorting: 113,610 versus 98,839, a 14.9% lead. These are workloads that often scale with core count and memory bandwidth, and the 8324P’s 32 cores and six-channel memory (230.4 GB/s) give it an edge over the 4585PX’s 16 cores and dual-channel memory (89.6 GB/s). Still, the 4585PX wins 14 of 17 tests, and its overall average score is only 2.4% lower than the 8324P’s — a remarkable result given half the cores.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has better single-threaded performance?

A: The 4585PX is far ahead. In PassMark single-thread, it scores 4,795 versus 2,367, a 50.6% lead. All Cinebench single-core tests show a ~19.7% advantage for the 4585PX.

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The 4585PX wins every multi-threaded benchmark in the head-to-head set, including Cinebench R23 multi-core (60,451 vs 48,557) and PassMark multithread (71,552 vs 57,127). Despite having 16 fewer cores, its higher clocks and Zen 5 architecture deliver better overall throughput.

Q: What about memory bandwidth and PCIe lanes?

A: The 8324P has six-channel memory with 230.4 GB/s bandwidth and 96 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only). The 4585PX has dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s and 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. If you need massive memory throughput or many PCIe lanes, the 8324P is the clear choice.

Q: Do both support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both support ECC memory. They also both support DDR5, but the 8324P uses a six-channel bus while the 4585PX uses dual-channel.

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics?

A: Only the 4585PX has integrated graphics (Radeon Graphics). The 8324P has no integrated GPU, so a discrete graphics card is required for display output.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The 8324P has an average benchmark score of 103,329, while the 4585PX scores 100,819. The 8324P is 2.5% higher, but the 4585PX is within 2.4% of the 8324P in head-to-head average — a very tight race.

Architecture Differences

The two chips are built on different Zen generations and process nodes. The 8324P uses Zen 4c (codenamed Siena) on TSMC’s 5 nm process, while the 4585PX uses Zen 5 (codenamed Grado) on TSMC’s 4 nm process. The 8324P has a die size of 4x 73 mm², the 4585PX uses 2x 70.6 mm². The 8324P has 32 cores and 64 threads; the 4585PX has 16 cores and 32 threads. L1 cache differs per core: 64 KB for the 8324P versus 80 KB for the 4585PX. L2 cache is identical at 1 MB per core, and both have 128 MB shared L3.

The 8324P uses AMD Socket SP6, while the 4585PX uses AMD Socket AM5. The 8324P’s memory bus is six-channel with 230.4 GB/s bandwidth; the 4585PX is dual-channel with 89.6 GB/s. PCIe connectivity also differs: the 8324P provides 96 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), the 4585PX provides 24 Gen 5 lanes. The 4585PX includes Radeon Graphics; the 8324P does not. These architectural differences explain the benchmark results: the 8324P trades clock speed and per-core efficiency for core count and memory bandwidth, while the 4585PX prioritizes high clocks and modern instruction throughput.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD EPYC 8324P | AMD EPYC 4585PX |

|-------|----------------|-----------------|

| Cores | 32 | 16 |

| Threads | 64 | 32 |

| Base clock | 2.65 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| Boost clock | 3.00 GHz | 5.70 GHz |

| TDP | 180 W | 170 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP6 | AMD Socket AM5 |

| Process node | 5 nm | 4 nm |

| L1 cache (per core) | 64 KB | 80 KB |

| Memory bus | Six-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 230.4 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| PCIe lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 96 Lanes | Gen 5, 24 Lanes |

| Integrated graphics | None | Radeon Graphics |

Where Each One Wins

The 4585PX wins in every Cinebench test and in most PassMark CPU workloads, including multithread, physics, prime numbers, floating point, integer, extended instructions, and single-thread. It is the better choice for general compute, compilation, rendering, and any workload that benefits from high clock speeds and modern IPC. Its 5.70 GHz boost clock and Zen 5 architecture give it a decisive edge in latency-sensitive tasks.

The 8324P wins in data compression, encryption, and random string sorting. These workloads are sensitive to memory bandwidth and core count, and the 8324P’s six-channel memory (230.4 GB/s) and 32 cores provide a measurable advantage. It also offers 96 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, making it suitable for systems with many NVMe drives, GPUs, or network adapters. If your workload involves heavy compression, cryptographic operations, or large-scale data shuffling, the 8324P is the stronger performer.

The Verdict

The choice comes down to workload profile and platform requirements. The 4585PX is the better all-around CPU for most server and workstation tasks. It wins 14 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, delivers 50.6% higher single-thread performance, and still leads in multi-threaded tests despite having half the cores. Its launch MSRP is $699, compared to $1,895 for the 8324P. The 4585PX also adds integrated graphics and uses the AM5 socket, which may simplify system integration.

The 8324P is the pick when memory bandwidth and core count are paramount. Its six-channel memory and 96 PCIe lanes make it a natural fit for high-density storage servers, database workloads, or scientific computing that moves large datasets. It wins decisively in encryption (28% ahead) and data compression (9.7% ahead), and it offers a 128 MB shared L3 cache just like the 4585PX. If you need massive memory throughput and many PCIe devices, the 8324P is the right choice — but for raw compute speed per dollar and per core, the 4585PX is the clear winner.