AMD EPYC 9454 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 228V Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V and the AMD EPYC 9454 are positioned at opposite ends of the computing spectrum, yet benchmark aggregates place them within 1% of each other in average score. The Intel chip, a 17-watt mobile processor from the Lunar Lake series, and the AMD EPYC, a 290-watt server behemoth with 48 cores, represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The data shows that while the EPYC dominates in raw throughput, the Core Ultra 5 228V's aggregate score of 21,440 is nearly identical to the EPYC's 21,223, a difference of just 1% in Intel's favor. This paradox is explained entirely by the benchmarks used and the architectural priorities of each silicon.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD EPYC 9454 wins every single head-to-head benchmark recorded, with no wins for the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V. The margin is not trivial; it is a complete rout in terms of absolute performance. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 73,375 against Intel's 9,932, a delta of -86.5% for the Intel part. This means the EPYC delivers roughly 7.4 times the multi-threaded rendering performance of the Core Ultra 5 228V.

Single-core results tell a similar, though slightly less extreme, story. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC 9454 posts 10,358 versus the Core Ultra 5 228V's 1,758, a -83% delta. The EPYC's advantage persists across older Cinebench versions as well. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the score is 30,817 for AMD versus 6,491 for Intel (-78.9%), and in single-core, it is 4,350 versus 916 (-78.9%). The R15 tests follow the same pattern: multi-core 7,396 versus 1,502.5 (-79.7%) and single-core 1,044 versus 267 (-74.4%).

The pattern is clear. The EPYC 9454's advantage in these tests ranges from a 74.4% lead in R15 single-core to an 86.5% lead in R23 multi-core. The data suggests that the EPYC's higher base clock of 2.75 GHz and boost clock of 3.80 GHz, combined with 48 cores and 96 threads, simply overwhelms the Intel part's 8 cores and 8 threads, despite the Intel chip's higher 4.50 GHz boost clock. The Core Ultra 5 228V does not win any of the six head-to-head tests, making its overall average score competitive only because the dataset includes other workloads where the mobile chip's efficiency shines.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is vast. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V is built on a 3 nm process node at TSMC, while the AMD EPYC 9454 uses a 5 nm process node, also from TSMC. This gives Intel a transistor density advantage, but AMD compensates with sheer scale. The EPYC packs 52,560 million transistors across eight chiplets, each measuring 72 mm², whereas the Intel die size is not specified in the data.

Core counts are the most obvious divergence. The Intel chip has 8 cores and 8 threads, with no hyperthreading. The AMD part has 48 cores and 96 threads, offering six times the core count and twelve times the thread count. Cache hierarchies are equally different. The Core Ultra 5 228V features 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 8 MB L3 cache. The EPYC 9454 has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, but a massive 256 MB of shared L3 cache. This 256 MB pool is 32 times larger than Intel's L3, which is crucial for server workloads with large working sets.

Memory support also separates them. The Intel part uses dual-channel memory, with support listed as "unknown" and dependent on the motherboard. The EPYC uses twelve-channel memory with a specified bandwidth of 460.8 GB/s and native ECC support. The Intel chip does not support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity is another major split: the EPYC offers Gen 5 with 128 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel chip offers Gen 5 with only 4 lanes. Integrated graphics are present on the Intel chip (Arc 130V), while the EPYC has none, as expected for a server processor.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 9454 has 48 cores and 96 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V has only 8 cores and 8 threads. The EPYC offers six times the core count and twelve times the thread count.

Q: Why is the average benchmark score so similar despite the EPYC's massive lead in Cinebench?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V has an average benchmark score of 21,440, while the AMD EPYC 9454 averages 21,223, a 1% difference. This is because the EPYC's nearest rivals list includes Intel Core Ultra 7 155U and AMD Ryzen 5 7530U, indicating that the average score is influenced by a broad set of workloads, not just the Cinebench tests where the EPYC dominates.

Q: What is the difference in cache size between the two?

A: The AMD EPYC 9454 has 256 MB of shared L3 cache, whereas the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V has 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC also has 64 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, while Intel has 192 KB of L1 per core and 2.5 MB of L2 per core.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 9454 supports ECC memory and uses DDR5 with a twelve-channel memory bus. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V does not support ECC memory and uses dual-channel memory.

Q: What are the process nodes for each chip?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V is fabricated on a 3 nm process node at TSMC. The AMD EPYC 9454 is fabricated on a 5 nm process node, also at TSMC.

Q: Does either processor have integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V includes integrated graphics in the form of Arc 130V. The AMD EPYC 9454 has no integrated graphics, which is typical for its server/workstation market segment.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every measurable specification. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD EPYC 9454 has 48 cores and 96 threads. Base clocks are 2.10 GHz for Intel and 2.75 GHz for AMD, but the boost clock is higher on the Intel part at 4.50 GHz versus 3.80 GHz. Thermal design power is a stark contrast: 17 watts for the Intel mobile chip versus 290 watts for the AMD server chip.

The socket types are incompatible: Intel uses BGA 2833, while AMD uses Socket SP5. The process node differs (3 nm vs 5 nm), and the transistor count is only listed for AMD at 52,560 million. Cache configurations are different across all levels, with Intel using 192 KB L1 per core and 2.5 MB L2 per core, while AMD uses 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2. The L3 cache is 8 MB shared for Intel versus 256 MB shared for AMD.

Memory support diverges significantly. Intel lists memory support as "unknown" and dependent on motherboard, with a dual-channel bus. AMD specifies DDR5 with a twelve-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 460.8 GB/s. ECC memory is supported only on the AMD part. PCIe lanes are 4 (Gen 5) for Intel versus 128 (Gen 5) for AMD. Integrated graphics are present on Intel (Arc 130V) but absent on AMD. Release dates are 2024-09-23 for Intel and 2022-11-09 for AMD. The AMD part has a launch MSRP of $5225, while the Intel part has no listed MSRP. Market segments are Mobile for Intel and Server/Workstation for AMD.

The Verdict

The data points to two entirely different buyers. The AMD EPYC 9454 is the clear choice for any workload where raw multi-threading is paramount. Its 86.5% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core, combined with 256 MB of L3 cache and 460.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth, makes it the only option here for heavy server or workstation tasks. The 48-core, 96-thread configuration, paired with 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, is built for scale. Its launch MSRP of $5225 reflects its enterprise positioning.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V, despite losing every head-to-head benchmark, holds its own in the aggregate because its 17-watt TDP and mobile design allow it to compete in different workloads. Its average score of 21,440 is 1% higher than the EPYC's 21,223, and it sits within 0.2% of the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and 0.3% of the Intel Core i9-11900H. This suggests that for single-threaded or power-constrained tasks, the Intel chip is not just competitive but offers superior efficiency. The integrated Arc 130V graphics also add value for a mobile system that does not require a discrete GPU.

Who should pick which? If the requirement is a high-core-count server processor with massive memory bandwidth and ECC support, the EPYC 9454 is the only logical choice. If the requirement is a low-power mobile processor with integrated graphics and competitive single-thread performance, the Core Ultra 5 228V is the one to select. The benchmark results do not present a contest; they present two distinct tools for two distinct jobs. The EPYC wins on brute force, the Intel chip wins on efficiency and portability. Your use case dictates the winner.