AMD EPYC 9254 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 115U Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a complete sweep for the AMD EPYC 9254, winning all six recorded Cinebench comparisons against the Intel Core Ultra 5 115U. The margins are not close; they are consistently massive across every test, with the EPYC 9254 delivering roughly five times the performance of the Core Ultra 5 115U in each workload.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 9254 scores 54,473 points against 10,855 for the Core Ultra 5 115U, a 401.8% advantage. This is the headline result: the server processor produces five times the multi-threaded rendering output of the mobile chip. The single-core result in the same test tells a similar story, with the EPYC 9254 at 7,690 versus 1,532, a 402% lead. This indicates that the architectural advantage is not limited to core count; even a single Zen 4 core outperforms a single Meteor Lake core by a wide margin in this test.

The pattern repeats in older Cinebench versions. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the EPYC 9254 scores 22,878 against 4,559, again a 401.8% gap. Single-core in R20 shows 3,229 versus 643, a 402.2% lead. Cinebench R15 multi-core produces 5,490 against 1,094 (401.8% delta), and R15 single-core gives 774 versus 154 (402.6% delta). Across every recorded benchmark, the EPYC 9254 holds a lead between 401.8% and 402.6%, an unusually consistent margin that points to a fundamental performance ceiling difference between the two designs.

The Core Ultra 5 115U does not secure a single win in the head-to-head set. Its best relative showing is its passmark single-thread score of 3,057, but no passmark results are recorded for the EPYC 9254 in this database, so direct comparison is limited to the Cinebench suite. The data shows that in every measured rendering and compute task, the EPYC 9254 is the clear winner, with no overlap in performance envelopes.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built for entirely different markets, and the architecture reflects that split. The AMD EPYC 9254 is a server/workstation part based on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Genoa, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It packs 24 cores and 48 threads, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.15 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra 5 115U is a mobile processor based on the Meteor Lake architecture, built on Intel's 7 nm process, with 8 cores and 10 threads, a base clock of 1500 MHz (recorded as 1500.00) and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz.

The cache hierarchy differs substantially. The EPYC 9254 features 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a massive 128 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 115U has 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and only 10 MB of shared L3. The EPYC's 128 MB L3 is designed to feed 48 threads across 24 cores, while the Intel part's smaller cache suits a 10-thread mobile workload.

Memory systems are also divergent. The EPYC 9254 supports DDR5 with a twelve-channel memory bus, delivering 460.8 GB/s of bandwidth, and includes ECC support. The Core Ultra 5 115U supports DDR5 depending on the motherboard, uses a dual-channel bus, offers 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth, and has no ECC support. The EPYC's bandwidth advantage is a factor of over five, matching its compute lead.

The EPYC 9254 uses AMD Socket SP5 and provides PCIe Gen 5 with 128 lanes (CPU only). The Core Ultra 5 115U uses Intel BGA 2049 and provides PCIe Gen 4 with 12 lanes (CPU only). The EPYC is a server platform designed for expansion, while the Intel part is a compact mobile chip with integrated graphics: the Arc Xe-LPG 48EU. The EPYC has no integrated graphics, as expected for a server processor.

The transistor count and die size for the EPYC 9254 are recorded as 26,280 million transistors across a 4x 72 mm² die configuration. No transistor count or die size is recorded for the Core Ultra 5 115U. The EPYC uses a chiplet design with four dies, while the Intel part is a monolithic mobile processor, though the database does not specify the exact manufacturing details beyond the process node.

The EPYC 9254 was released on 2022-11-09 with a launch MSRP of $2299. The Core Ultra 5 115U was released on 2023-12-13 with no recorded launch MSRP. Both are listed as Active in production status, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-core performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 9254 wins all single-core Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 7,690 versus 1,532 for the Intel Core Ultra 5 115U, a 402% advantage. The same pattern holds in R20 (3,229 versus 643) and R15 (774 versus 154).

Q: How do the multi-core scores compare?

A: The EPYC 9254 dominates multi-core workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 54,473 against 10,855 for the Core Ultra 5 115U, a 401.8% lead. R20 multi-core shows 22,878 versus 4,559, and R15 multi-core shows 5,490 versus 1,094.

Q: What is the core and thread configuration for each?

A: The EPYC 9254 has 24 cores and 48 threads. The Core Ultra 5 115U has 8 cores and 10 threads. The EPYC also has a higher base clock of 2.90 GHz versus 1500 MHz, though the Intel part has a slightly higher boost clock at 4.20 GHz versus 4.15 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports more memory bandwidth?

A: The EPYC 9254 supports twelve-channel DDR5 memory with 460.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 115U supports dual-channel DDR5 with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The EPYC also supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not.

Q: What are the power and thermal profiles?

A: The EPYC 9254 has a TDP of 200 watts, while the Core Ultra 5 115U has a TDP of 15 watts. This reflects their market segments: the EPYC is a server processor, and the Intel part is a mobile processor.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes?

A: The EPYC 9254 provides 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only). The Core Ultra 5 115U provides 12 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only). The EPYC offers both more lanes and a newer PCIe generation.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 9254 | Intel Core Ultra 5 115U |

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

| Cores | 24 | 8 |

| Threads | 48 | 10 |

| Base Clock | 2.90 GHz | 1500 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.15 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| TDP | 200 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP5 | Intel BGA 2049 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Meteor Lake |

| Process Node | 5 nm (TSMC) | 7 nm (Intel) |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 112 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 128 MB (shared) | 10 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Twelve-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 460.8 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 128 Lanes | Gen 4, 12 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Arc Xe-LPG 48EU |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2022-11-09 | 2023-12-13 |

| Launch MSRP | $2299 | Not recorded |

| Part Number | 100-100000480 | SRN6F |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 9254 wins in every recorded benchmark category. It is the choice for multi-threaded rendering, as shown by its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 54,473, which is over five times the Core Ultra 5 115U's 10,855. It also wins single-core tasks, with a 402% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core, meaning even lightly threaded workloads favor the EPYC.

The EPYC 9254 is designed for server and workstation environments. Its 128 MB of L3 cache, twelve-channel memory bandwidth of 460.8 GB/s, and 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes make it suitable for heavy compute, large datasets, and high-throughput I/O. The 200 W TDP indicates a processor that expects robust cooling and power delivery, typical of a rack-mounted server.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 115U wins on efficiency and integration. Its 15 W TDP is a fraction of the EPYC's 200 W, and it includes integrated graphics (Arc Xe-LPG 48EU), which the EPYC lacks. It is a mobile processor, designed for laptops where power draw and heat are constraints. The database does not record any benchmark where the Core Ultra 5 115U outperforms the EPYC 9254, but its lower power and integrated GPU make it the only viable option for battery-powered devices.

The Core Ultra 5 115U also has a slightly higher boost clock of 4.20 GHz versus 4.15 GHz, though this does not translate into a win in any recorded test. Its smaller physical footprint (BGA 2049 versus SP5) and dual-channel memory are appropriate for thin-and-light designs.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 9254 is the superior processor in every measured dimension. Its six head-to-head wins, all with deltas above 400%, demonstrate a performance class that the Intel Core Ultra 5 115U cannot approach. The EPYC's 24 cores, 48 threads, 128 MB L3 cache, and 460.8 GB/s memory bandwidth place it in a different performance tier entirely.

Anyone needing maximum compute throughput, whether for rendering, simulation, or data processing, should choose the EPYC 9254. Its benchmark results justify its server/workstation positioning, and its 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes provide expansion headroom for accelerators and storage. The 200 W TDP is a non-issue in a server chassis designed for high-power components.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 115U is the pick for mobile systems where power efficiency and integrated graphics matter more than raw performance. Its 15 W TDP and Arc Xe-LPG 48EU make it suitable for laptops, but the recorded benchmarks show it is not a competitor to the EPYC 9254 in any compute task. Its average benchmark score of 16,753 versus the EPYC's 15,756 is misleading, as it includes passmark scores that are not recorded for the EPYC, and the head-to-head Cinebench data shows a one-sided contest.

The verdict from the database is clear: the EPYC 9254 is designed to crush workloads, and it does so with a 401.8% to 402.6% margin across all Cinebench tests. The Core Ultra 5 115U is designed to conserve power, and it does so with a 15 W TDP. They serve different markets, and the benchmark data shows no overlap in performance capability.