AMD EPYC 9634 vs AMD EPYC 9655 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 9655 wins every single benchmark in the comparison set, 17 wins to 0. The smallest margin is in PassMark single-thread performance, where the 9655 scores 3847 against 2924 for the 9634, a 31.6% advantage. That gap is substantial, but it is the narrowest difference recorded across the entire test suite.

The Cinebench results show a remarkably consistent pattern. Across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both multicore and single-core tests, the 9655 leads by exactly 44.6% in every case. For example, Cinebench R23 multicore shows 132672 for the 9655 versus 91752 for the 9634, while the single-core run shows 18730 versus 12953. This uniformity suggests the performance delta is structural, not workload-dependent.

PassMark results reveal where the 9655 stretches its lead even further. Floating point math is the standout: the 9655 scores 662958 versus 353784, a massive 87.4% advantage. Physics performance is even more lopsided, with the 9655 at 25947 against 12291, a 111.1% lead, the largest delta in the entire comparison. Random string sorting favors the 9655 by 68.4%, while integer math shows a 57% gap. Extended instructions land at 47.8%, data compression at 46.3%, and data encryption at 38.6%. Prime number finding shows a 35.9% lead.

The average benchmark score tells the same story: the 9655 averages 373479 across all tests, while the 9634 averages 244274. That is a 52.9% difference in aggregate. The 9655 sits in the 100th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the 9634 is in the 99th. In the 9655's nearest rivals list, the Intel Xeon 6960P trails by 2.3%, and the AMD EPYC 9754 trails by 2.5%, so the 9655 is not merely ahead of the 9634, it is at the very top of the current field. The 9634, by contrast, sits within 2.5% of the Intel Xeon 6747P and 2.9% of the Intel Xeon 6980P, placing it in a competitive but not dominant tier.

Architecture Differences

The two processors belong to different generations and architectures. The EPYC 9655 is built on Zen 5, codenamed Turin, part of the EPYC 9005 series. The EPYC 9634 uses Zen 4, codenamed Genoa, from the EPYC 9004 series. The manufacturing process differs as well: the 9655 uses a 4 nm node from TSMC, while the 9634 uses a 5 nm node from the same foundry. Transistor counts reflect this: the 9655 packs 99,780 million transistors across 12 chiplets of 70.6 mm² each, while the 9634 has 78,840 million transistors across 12 chiplets of 72 mm² each. So the 9655 has roughly 27% more transistors in a slightly smaller per-die area.

Core counts differ. The 9655 has 96 cores and 192 threads, while the 9634 has 84 cores and 168 threads. Base clock on the 9655 is 2.60 GHz versus 2.25 GHz on the 9634, and boost clock is 4.50 GHz versus 3.70 GHz. Both use the same AMD Socket SP5, and both are server/workstation parts with active production status. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Cache configurations are similar in size but differ in per-core allocation. Both share 384 MB of L3 cache. The L1 cache is 80 KB per core on the 9655 versus 64 KB per core on the 9634. L2 is 1 MB per core on both. Memory support is DDR5 for both, with a twelve-channel bus. The memory bandwidth is higher on the 9655 at 576.0 GB/s versus 460.8 GB/s on the 9634. Both support ECC memory. PCIe is identical: Gen 5 with 128 lanes (CPU only). The 9655 has no integrated graphics, and the 9634 also has none listed.

The 9655 was released on 2024-10-09, while the 9634 came out on 2022-11-09, roughly two years earlier. The 9655 carries a launch MSRP of $11852, and the 9634 has a launch MSRP of $10304. The part numbers are 100-000000674 for the 9655 and 100-100000797 for the 9634.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows no benchmark category where the 9634 comes out ahead. Every recorded test, from single-thread responsiveness to heavy multithreaded workloads, favors the 9655. However, the magnitude of the lead varies by workload type, which matters for practical decision-making.

For workloads dominated by floating point math or physics simulation, the 9655 is in a different league. The 87.4% lead in floating point math and 111.1% lead in physics are the largest gaps recorded. These are workloads that stress the FPU and memory pipeline, and the Zen 5 architecture with its higher boost clock and faster memory bandwidth clearly pays off. Scientific computing, simulation, and rendering workloads would see the biggest relative gains.

For integer-heavy tasks, the lead narrows somewhat but remains substantial. Integer math shows a 57% advantage, and data compression shows 46.3%. These are typical server workloads, including database transactions, virtualization, and general-purpose compute. The 9655 still wins decisively, but the gap is closer to the average than to the floating point outlier.

Single-threaded performance is the smallest gap at 31.6%, but it is still a very large margin. For lightly threaded workloads, such as management tasks, scripting, or single-threaded legacy applications, the 9655's higher boost clock (4.50 GHz versus 3.70 GHz) provides a clear edge. The 9634 is not slow in absolute terms, but it cannot match the newer core design.

The one area where the 9634 might be preferable is in absolute power consumption, though the data only lists TDP, not measured power draw. The 9634 has a TDP of 290, while the 9655 has a TDP of 400. For dense deployments with strict power or thermal limits, the 9634's lower TDP is a real advantage. It also has a lower launch MSRP, though both are premium server parts.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports only one conclusion: the AMD EPYC 9655 is the superior processor in every measured benchmark. It wins all 17 head-to-head tests, with leads ranging from 31.6% to 111.1%. The average benchmark score is 52.9% higher. The 9655 sits in the 100th percentile of all CPUs, while the 9634 is in the 99th, so the 9655 is not just better than the 9634, it is at the top of the entire database.

The 9634 should be chosen only in specific scenarios. If your deployment is constrained by power or thermal limits, the 290 TDP versus 400 TDP is a significant difference. If you already own Genoa-based systems and are looking for a drop-in upgrade, both use Socket SP5, so the 9634 could serve as a lower-power option. But for any new purchase where performance is the priority, the 9655 is the clear pick.

The 9655's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 9535 at 1.6% behind and the Intel Xeon 6960P at 2.3% behind, so it is competitive at the very top of the market. The 9634's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6980P at 2.9% ahead and the AMD EPYC 9684X at 8.5% ahead, meaning it is not even the top of its own generation in the database. If you are choosing between these two specific processors, the 9655 wins on every measured axis. The only reasons to pick the 9634 are power envelope and initial price, both of which are outside the benchmark scope.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 9655 has 96 cores and 192 threads, while the AMD EPYC 9634 has 84 cores and 168 threads.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark physics, where the 9655 leads by 111.1% (25947 versus 12291). Floating point math is second at 87.4% (662958 versus 353784).

Q: Are the single-core performance differences smaller than multicore differences?

A: No. The single-core Cinebench R23 gap is 44.6%, the same as the multicore gap. In PassMark single-thread, the gap is 31.6%, which is smaller than the multicore gap of 44.6% in Cinebench R23.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory type and PCIe?

A: Yes. Both support DDR5 memory with a twelve-channel bus, and both have PCIe Gen 5 with 128 lanes (CPU only). The 9655 has higher memory bandwidth at 576.0 GB/s versus 460.8 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a lower TDP?

A: The AMD EPYC 9634 has a TDP of 290, while the AMD EPYC 9655 has a TDP of 400.

Q: How does each processor rank against all CPUs in the database?

A: The 9655 is in the 100th percentile, while the 9634 is in the 99th. The 9655's average benchmark score is 373479, and the 9634's is 244274.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 9655 | AMD EPYC 9634 |

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

| Series | EPYC 9005 series | EPYC 9004 series |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Zen 4 |

| Codename | Turin | Genoa |

| Generation | EPYC (Zen 5 (Turin)) | EPYC (Zen 4 (Genoa)) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 99,780 million | 78,840 million |

| Die Size | 12x 70.6 mm² | 12x 72 mm² |

| Cores | 96 | 84 |

| Threads | 192 | 168 |

| Base Clock | 2.60 GHz | 2.25 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.50 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| TDP | 400 | 290 |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

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

| L3 Cache | 384 MB (shared) | 384 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 576.0 GB/s | 460.8 GB/s |

| Release Date | 2024-10-09 | 2022-11-09 |

| Launch MSRP | $11852 | $10304 |

| Part Number | 100-000000674 | 100-100000797 |

Both processors share the same socket (AMD Socket SP5), memory type (DDR5), memory bus (twelve-channel), ECC support, PCIe configuration (Gen 5, 128 Lanes), market segment (Server/Workstation), production status (Active), and both are not multiplier unlocked. The 9655 has no integrated graphics, and the 9634 has no integrated graphics listed either.