AMD EPYC 9454 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 155U Comparison

The AMD EPYC 9454 and Intel Core Ultra 7 155U represent opposite ends of the computing spectrum. The data shows a server-grade, 48-core behemoth designed for sustained throughput, facing a 12-core mobile processor built for efficiency. While their average benchmark scores are nearly identical, the underlying performance profiles are drastically different, making the choice between them entirely dependent on the workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are not close; they are a complete sweep. The AMD EPYC 9454 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, with margins that grow from substantial to astronomical. In the multi-core tests, the EPYC’s advantage is overwhelming. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC scores 7396 against the Intel’s 1585, a 366.6% lead. This gap widens in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the EPYC’s 30817 dwarfs the Ultra 7’s 5765, a 434.6% difference. The most extreme result is in Cinebench R23 multi-core: the EPYC 9454 posts 73375, while the Core Ultra 7 155U manages only 9674.5, a staggering 658.4% deficit for the Intel part.

Single-core performance tells a similar, though slightly less lopsided, story. The EPYC 9454 leads in Cinebench R23 single-core with a score of 10358, compared to the Ultra 7’s 1666, a 521.7% difference. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 single-core (4350 vs 813, a 435.1% gap) and Cinebench R15 single-core (1044 vs 238.5, a 337.7% gap). The Intel Core Ultra 7 155U fails to register a single win in this comparison.

Despite this dominant performance, the average benchmark scores tell a different story. The EPYC 9454 has an average benchmark score of 21223, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 155U scores 21174. The delta is a mere 0.2% in favor of the AMD part. This near-parity in average score, contrasted with the massive Cinebench margins, highlights how different benchmark suites weight various workloads. The EPYC’s victories in heavily threaded tasks are offset by the Intel’s performance in other areas not covered in this head-to-head list, such as PassMark’s data compression and encryption tests, which are only listed for the Intel part.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two processors is vast. The AMD EPYC 9454 is built on TSMC’s 5 nm process and uses the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Genoa. It packs 48 cores and 96 threads into an AMD Socket SP5. Its cache hierarchy is massive: 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 256 MB of L3 cache. It supports DDR5 memory across a twelve-channel bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 460.8 GB/s. It also features ECC memory support and provides 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU. The EPYC is a server/workstation part with a 290 TDP.

In contrast, the Intel Core Ultra 7 155U is a mobile processor built on Intel’s 7 nm process using the Meteor Lake architecture. It has 12 cores and 14 threads, a configuration that typically includes performance and efficiency cores. It uses the Intel BGA 2049 socket. Its cache is smaller: 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. It supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, with a much lower memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. It lacks ECC memory support and offers only 12 PCIe Gen 4 lanes from the CPU. Notably, the Intel part includes integrated graphics (Arc Xe-LPG 64EU), while the EPYC has none. The Intel part’s TDP is just 15, reflecting its mobile, power-efficient design.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD EPYC 9454 has 48 cores and 96 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 155U has 12 cores and 14 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 155U has a higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz, compared to the AMD EPYC 9454’s 3.80 GHz.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 7 155U have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Intel Core Ultra 7 155U includes Arc Xe-LPG 64EU integrated graphics. The AMD EPYC 9454 does not have integrated graphics.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD EPYC 9454 has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 21223, compared to the Intel Core Ultra 7 155U’s 21174, a difference of 0.2%.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD EPYC 9454 offers 460.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth via a twelve-channel memory bus. The Intel Core Ultra 7 155U offers 89.6 GB/s via a dual-channel bus.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 9454 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 155U does not.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous for specific use cases. The AMD EPYC 9454 is the only choice for workloads that demand extreme multi-threaded throughput. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 73375 is over seven times higher than the Intel’s 9674.5. This makes it the superior part for server virtualization, scientific computing, and heavy content creation that scales across many cores. Its massive 256 MB L3 cache and 460.8 GB/s memory bandwidth further reinforce its position for data-intensive tasks.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 155U, despite losing every head-to-head test, is the only viable option for mobile computing. Its 15 TDP and integrated graphics are essential for a laptop. The EPYC 9454, with a 290 TDP and no integrated graphics, is not suitable for a mobile chassis. The data shows that the Intel part is competitive in the average benchmark score, suggesting it excels in other, non-Cinebench workloads. However, for raw processing power, the EPYC 9454 is in a different league.

Specification Differences

The following table outlines the key differences in specifications between the two processors.

| Specification | AMD EPYC 9454 | Intel Core Ultra 7 155U |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Cores | 48 | 12 |

| Threads | 96 | 14 |

| Base Clock | 2.75 GHz | 1700.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.80 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 290 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP5 | Intel BGA 2049 |

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

| L3 Cache | 256 MB (shared) | 12 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 64EU |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

| Launch MSRP | $5225 | $490 |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 9454 is the definitive winner in any scenario that can use its 48 cores. The Cinebench results are a clear indicator: it leads by 366.6% in R15 multi-core and by 658.4% in R23 multi-core. This makes it the clear choice for rendering farms, database servers, and any other application that can distribute work across 96 threads. Its high memory bandwidth and ECC support are also critical for server stability and large datasets.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 155U wins in the mobile and ultra-portable segment. Its 15 TDP is a fraction of the EPYC’s 290 TDP, making it suitable for fanless or lightly cooled designs. Its integrated Arc Xe-LPG 64EU graphics provide display output and basic acceleration, which the EPYC cannot offer. Its higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz may also give it an edge in lightly threaded, bursty workloads, even though its Cinebench single-core scores are far lower. Ultimately, the Intel part wins where portability and power efficiency are the primary requirements, while the AMD part wins where raw compute power is non-negotiable.