AMD EPYC 7413 vs AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 and the AMD EPYC 7413 are two very different AMD processors, despite sharing a brand and both sitting in the 95th performance percentile. The Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 is a 16-core Zen 5 mobile part designed for a compact socket, while the EPYC 7413 is a 24-core Zen 3 server behemoth. Benchmark data shows a clear split: the EPYC 7413 dominates in most multi-threaded server workloads, but the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 counters with significant wins in single-threaded and specific math test scenarios.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7413 is the clear winner for traditional server and heavy multi-threaded workloads. It takes 9 of the 15 head-to-head benchmarks, with its largest advantages coming in Cinebench R23 multi-core, data encryption, and physics simulations. The data shows the EPYC 7413’s 48 threads and 128 MB of shared L3 cache give it a decisive edge in workloads that scale with core count and cache capacity. Its wins in integer math and data compression confirm it is the stronger choice for database, virtualization, and general compute tasks.

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395, however, wins in six benchmarks, and its victories are strategically important. Its most striking result is a 69.9% lead in PassMark single-thread performance, indicating that its Zen 5 architecture and 5.10 GHz boost clock deliver superior per-core performance. It also wins in extended instructions (13.9% ahead) and floating-point math, suggesting it handles certain scientific and SIMD-heavy tasks more efficiently. The Ryzen part also edges out the EPYC in PassMark multi-thread score by 1.7%, a narrower margin than expected given the EPYC’s extra 8 cores and 16 threads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 wins decisively in single-thread performance, scoring 4078 in PassMark single-thread versus 2400 for the EPYC 7413, a 69.9% advantage. It also holds a smaller lead in PassMark extended instructions.

Q: Which processor is better for Cinebench multi-core rendering?

A: The AMD EPYC 7413 is substantially stronger in Cinebench R23 multi-core, scoring 43044 against the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395’s 35061, an 18.5% lead. The EPYC’s advantage comes from its 24 cores and 48 threads.

Q: How do the two processors compare in data encryption performance?

A: The EPYC 7413 outperforms the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 in PassMark data encryption, scoring 48492 versus 32840, a 32.3% difference. This suggests the server chip is better suited for security and cryptography workloads.

Q: Does the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 includes a Radeon 8060S integrated GPU. The EPYC 7413 has no integrated graphics, as it is a server-focused processor.

Q: Which processor has a higher base clock speed?

A: The Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 has a base clock of 3.00 GHz, which is higher than the EPYC 7413’s 2.65 GHz base clock. The Ryzen also has a significantly higher boost clock at 5.10 GHz versus 3.60 GHz for the EPYC.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores between the two?

A: The Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 has an average benchmark score of 80762, while the EPYC 7413 has an average of 80041. This puts the Ryzen part slightly ahead, with both processors sitting in the 95th percentile of all CPUs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single largest win for the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 comes in PassMark single-thread, where it scores 4078 versus the EPYC 7413’s 2400, a massive 69.9% delta. This result is echoed in Cinebench R15 single-core, though the EPYC wins that test. In Cinebench R15, the EPYC scores 612 while the Ryzen trails at 306, a 50% deficit for the Ryzen part. The Ryzen’s other significant win is in PassMark extended instructions, scoring 52067 against the EPYC’s 45696, a 13.9% edge.

The EPYC 7413’s largest victory is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 6076 versus the Ryzen’s 2012.5, a 66.9% advantage. This is an oddity, as the Ryzen wins PassMark single-thread but loses Cinebench single-core by such a wide margin. The EPYC also shows strong wins in PassMark physics (4708 vs 3189, a 32.3% lead) and data encryption (48492 vs 32840, also 32.3% ahead). In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC leads 43044 to 35061, an 18.5% margin.

The Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 manages a narrow win in PassMark multi-thread, scoring 51502 against the EPYC’s 50641, a 1.7% edge. It also wins PassMark floating-point math, 120533 to 118881, a slim 1.4% margin. The data shows the Ryzen part is competitive in aggregate multi-thread metrics, but the EPYC pulls ahead in specific core-heavy tests.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are the most obvious difference: the EPYC 7413 has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 has 16 cores and 32 threads. Clock speeds also differ, with the Ryzen having a 3.00 GHz base and 5.10 GHz boost, compared to the EPYC’s 2.65 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost. The EPYC has a much higher TDP at 180 watts, while the Ryzen is rated at 55 watts.

Memory configurations are distinct, with the Ryzen supporting LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus offering 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the EPYC uses DDR4 across an eight-channel bus for 204.8 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. PCIe lanes differ significantly: the EPYC provides Gen 4 with 128 lanes, while the Ryzen offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes. The Ryzen includes integrated Radeon 8060S graphics, while the EPYC has none. The Ryzen uses AMD Socket FP11, and the EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 is built on the Zen 5 architecture with the codename Strix Halo, manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The AMD EPYC 7413 uses the older Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Milan, on a 7 nm process, also from TSMC. The EPYC’s die is listed as 4x 81 mm² with 16,600 million transistors, while the Ryzen’s transistor count and die size are not specified.

Cache layouts differ notably. The Ryzen has 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with a 64 MB shared L3 cache. The EPYC has 64 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, but a much larger 128 MB shared L3 cache. This larger L3 pool on the EPYC helps explain its strong performance in data compression and multi-threaded server tasks.

The Ryzen’s Zen 5 architecture brings a newer design and higher clock speeds, which explains its single-thread and extended instruction wins. However, the EPYC’s Zen 3 architecture, despite being older, scales better with its 24 cores. The Ryzen is a mobile part, while the EPYC is a server/workstation part, which aligns with the EPYC’s 128 PCIe lanes and higher TDP. The launch MSRP for the EPYC 7413 is $1825, while the Ryzen has no listed MSRP. Both processors have locked multipliers, meaning overclocking is not supported.