AMD EPYC 9254 vs AMD EPYC 9354P Comparison
AMD EPYC 9254
EPYC 9354P
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: AMD EPYC 9254 vs AMD EPYC 9354P
The AMD EPYC 9354P and AMD EPYC 9254 are both 5 nm Zen 4 Genoa server processors on the AMD Socket SP5 platform, but they are configured very differently. The 9354P is a 32-core part with a lower boost clock, while the 9254 is a 24-core part that clocks higher. Benchmark data shows a clear, consistent performance gap between them, with the 9354P winning every head-to-head test in the database.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The EPYC 9354P dominates the EPYC 9254 across all six Cinebench tests. The margin is remarkably uniform: in every single test, the 9354P leads by 17.2% to 17.3%. This consistency suggests the performance difference is structural rather than workload-dependent.
In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 9354P scores 63840 against the 9254's 54473, a 17.2% advantage. That translates to roughly 9,367 points of additional rendering throughput. The single-core R23 result tells a similar story: 9012 for the 9354P versus 7690 for the 9254, again a 17.2% gap. Even in the older R15 and R20 suites, the pattern holds exactly. The R15 multi-core test shows 6434 versus 5490 (17.2%), and R15 single-core shows 908 versus 774 (17.3%). The R20 results are 26812 versus 22878 in multi-core and 3785 versus 3229 in single-core, both with a 17.2% delta.
The 9354P's win count is 6, and the 9254 has 0 wins. There is no benchmark in the database where the 9254 pulls ahead. The average benchmark score for the 9354P is 15826, while the 9254 sits at 15756. That puts the 9354P just 0.4% ahead of the 9254 in the aggregate, which is a fascinating contrast to the Cinebench results. The reason is that the 9254's nearestRivals list includes the Intel Core i5-11400H (deltaPct 0) and the AMD Ryzen 3 7440U (deltaPct 0.5), while the 9354P's nearestRivals include the AMD EPYC 75F3 (deltaPct -0.2) and the AMD Ryzen 5 40 (deltaPct -0.4). The 9254 is effectively tied with those lower-end parts in the overall database, whereas the 9354P is surrounded by stronger competitors.
Architecture Differences
Both processors share the same fundamental architecture: Zen 4 on a 5 nm TSMC process, with the Genoa codename. They use the AMD Socket SP5 and support DDR5 memory across a twelve-channel memory bus with 460.8 GB/s of bandwidth. Both have ECC memory support and PCIe Gen 5 with 128 lanes (CPU only). Neither has integrated graphics, and both have an unlocked multiplier set to false.
The core configuration is where the two diverge. The 9354P has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the 9254 has 24 cores and 48 threads — a difference of 8 cores and 16 threads. The L3 cache scales with core count: the 9354P has 256 MB shared L3, while the 9254 has 128 MB shared L3. L1 and L2 caches are identical per core at 64 KB and 1 MB, respectively.
The transistor count reveals the physical difference. The 9354P packs 52,560 million transistors across 8x 72 mm² dies, while the 9254 uses 26,280 million transistors across 4x 72 mm² dies. That is exactly half the transistor budget and half the die count, which explains the cache and core disparity.
Clock speeds are where the 9254 fights back, but not enough. The 9254 has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.15 GHz. The 9354P has a higher base clock of 3.25 GHz but a lower boost clock of 3.80 GHz. The 9254's 0.35 GHz boost advantage is real, yet it cannot overcome the 8-core deficit. The TDP also differs: the 9354P is rated at 280 W, while the 9254 is at 200 W.
Where Each One Wins
The 9354P wins everywhere in the benchmark suite. For multi-threaded workloads — rendering, compiling, virtualized server consolidation — the 32 cores, 64 threads, and 256 MB of L3 cache deliver a 17.2% edge in Cinebench R23 multi-core. That is the kind of margin that matters for batch jobs where every minute of runtime costs money. The 9354P's higher base clock of 3.25 GHz also helps sustained all-core loads stay competitive.
The 9254 has a theoretical advantage in single-threaded boost potential. Its 4.15 GHz boost clock is higher than the 9354P's 3.80 GHz, but the benchmark data does not reflect that advantage. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the 9254 scores 7690 versus 9012 for the 9354P — a 17.2% deficit. The 9354P's higher base clock and better per-core performance in the tested scenarios mean the 9254's boost clock never translates into a win. The 9254 does have a lower TDP of 200 W versus 280 W, which could make it easier to cool in dense chassis, but the performance cost is steep.
For mixed workloads, the 9354P's larger L3 cache (256 MB versus 128 MB) is likely to help with data residency. The 9254's smaller cache and fewer cores make it a weaker choice for database workloads or large in-memory processing tasks. The 9254's niche would be environments where the 200 W TDP is a hard constraint and the 24 cores are sufficient.
Specification Differences
| Specification | AMD EPYC 9354P | AMD EPYC 9254 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores | 32 | 24 |
| Threads | 64 | 48 |
| Base Clock | 3.25 GHz | 2.90 GHz |
| Boost Clock | 3.80 GHz | 4.15 GHz |
| TDP | 280 W | 200 W |
| Transistors | 52,560 million | 26,280 million |
| Die Size | 8x 72 mm² | 4x 72 mm² |
| L3 Cache | 256 MB (shared) | 128 MB (shared) |
| Launch MSRP | $2730 | $2299 |
The 9354P has 8 more cores, 16 more threads, a higher base clock, double the L3 cache, and double the transistor count. The 9254 has a higher boost clock by 0.35 GHz and a lower TDP by 80 W. The 9354P's launch MSRP is $2730, while the 9254's is $2299. Both are active products released on 2022-11-09, and both are in the 69th percentile versus all CPUs.
FAQ
Q: Which processor has more cores?
A: The AMD EPYC 9354P has 32 cores and 64 threads. The AMD EPYC 9254 has 24 cores and 48 threads.
Q: Does the EPYC 9254 ever win a benchmark?
A: No. In the head-to-head data, the 9354P wins all 6 tests, with every deltaPct between 17.2% and 17.3%. The 9254's win count is 0.
Q: How much faster is the 9354P in Cinebench R23 multi-core?
A: The 9354P scores 63840 versus 54473 for the 9254, a 17.2% advantage. That is the same margin seen in R23 single-core, R20, and R15 tests.
Q: What is the cache difference between the two CPUs?
A: The 9354P has 256 MB of shared L3 cache, while the 9254 has 128 MB. L1 and L2 caches are identical per core: 64 KB and 1 MB, respectively.
Q: Does the 9254 have a higher boost clock?
A: Yes. The 9254 boosts to 4.15 GHz, while the 9354P boosts to 3.80 GHz. However, the 9354P still wins every single-core benchmark by 17.2% to 17.3%.
Q: What is the TDP of each processor?
A: The 9354P has a TDP of 280 W, and the 9254 has a TDP of 200 W. Both use the AMD Socket SP5 and support twelve-channel DDR5 memory with 460.8 GB/s bandwidth.
The Verdict
The data is unambiguous. The AMD EPYC 9354P is the faster processor in every benchmark recorded, with a consistent 17.2% lead across both multi-core and single-core tests. For any workload that cares about raw compute throughput — Cinebench rendering, code compilation, virtual machine density — the 9354P is the correct choice. Its 32 cores, 64 threads, and 256 MB L3 cache provide a structural advantage that the 9254's higher 4.15 GHz boost clock cannot offset.
The AMD EPYC 9254 is only preferable in one specific scenario: when the 200 W TDP is a hard requirement. The 9354P's 280 W TDP demands more cooling and power delivery headroom. If a server chassis is limited to 200 W per socket, the 9254 is the only option between the two. But that comes at a significant performance cost — the 9254 is 17.2% slower in multi-core Cinebench R23, which will extend job times and reduce throughput.
The aggregate benchmark scores tell a slightly different story. The 9354P's average is 15826, and the 9254's is 15756, a gap of only 0.4%. That narrow margin in the overall database is because the 9254 is compared against weaker rivals like the Intel Core i5-11400H and AMD Ryzen 3 7440U. The 9354P sits near the AMD EPYC 75F3 and AMD Ryzen 5 40, which pull its average upward context. Do not let that aggregate number mislead you — in direct head-to-head testing, the 9354P wins by a landslide.
For builders selecting between these two, the decision is simple. Unless the 200 W TDP limit is non-negotiable, the 9354P is the better processor. It costs more at launch MSRP ($2730 versus $2299), but it delivers a 17.2% performance uplift across the board. The 9254 is a lower-power alternative that sacrifices a third of its core count and half its L3 cache to save 80 W, and the benchmark results reflect that compromise. Pick the 9354P for performance, and only choose the 9254 if power constraints force your hand.