AMD EPYC 9634 vs AMD EPYC 9734 Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD EPYC 9734 and AMD EPYC 9634 are both 5 nm Zen 4 server parts on the AMD Socket SP5 platform, but the benchmark data shows two very different specialists. The EPYC 9734 (Bergamo) wins 6 of the 17 head-to-head tests, while the EPYC 9634 (Genoa) wins 11. The average benchmark score tells a similar story: the 9734 sits at 310,619, while the 9634 records 244,274.

The EPYC 9634 is the better all-rounder for traditional compute, single-threaded work, and physics-style workloads. It delivers a 5.2% advantage across every Cinebench test, both single-core and multi-core, and it dominates the PassMark physics test by 45.1%. Its passmark single-thread score of 2924 beats the 9734's 2310 by 21%. For database, virtualization, and general server workloads that rely on clock speed and per-core efficiency, the 9634 is the clear pick.

The EPYC 9734 is the throughput monster for data-heavy parallel jobs. It leads by 55.2% in floating point math, 49.7% in extended instructions, 37% in random string sorting, 29.7% in data compression, 18.1% in data encryption, and 13.5% in integer math. With 112 cores versus 84, the 9734 simply has more raw parallelism to throw at embarrassingly parallel tasks. Its passmark multithread score of 102,286 trails the 9634's 107,944 by 5.2%, which is surprising given the core count advantage, but the per-core clock disadvantage (3.00 GHz boost versus 3.70 GHz) explains that gap.

The verdict is straightforward. Choose the EPYC 9634 if you need balanced server performance, strong single-thread behavior, and the best Cinebench and physics results. Choose the EPYC 9734 if your workload is dominated by data compression, encryption, floating-point math, or string sorting, where its core count translates into massive percentage leads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD EPYC 9734 has 112 cores and 224 threads. The AMD EPYC 9634 has 84 cores and 168 threads.

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

A: The AMD EPYC 9634 wins every single-core benchmark. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score is 12953 versus 12274 for the 9734, a 5.2% lead. PassMark single-thread shows an even larger gap: 2924 versus 2310, a 21% advantage.

Q: Which processor is better for data compression workloads?

A: The AMD EPYC 9734 is dramatically better. It scores 2,900,008 in PassMark data compression versus 2,236,412 for the 9634, a 29.7% lead.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory configuration?

A: Yes. Both support DDR5 with a twelve-channel memory bus and 460.8 GB/s memory bandwidth. Both also support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The AMD EPYC 9734 has a 340 W TDP. The AMD EPYC 9634 has a 290 W TDP.

Q: Are these processors from the same generation?

A: Both are in the EPYC 9004 series and use the Zen 4 architecture on a 5 nm process from TSMC. The difference is the codename: the 9734 is Bergamo (Zen 4c), while the 9634 is Genoa (Zen 4).

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs share the same fundamental Zen 4 architecture, 5 nm process node, and TSMC foundry, but they diverge significantly in implementation. The EPYC 9734 uses the Bergamo codename and is classified as Zen 4c, which is a density-optimized variant. The EPYC 9634 uses the Genoa codename and is classified as standard Zen 4. This codename distinction explains most of the behavioral differences in the benchmark results.

The transistor counts differ notably. The 9734 packs 71,000 million transistors across 8 chiplets, each 73 mm². The 9634 has 78,840 million transistors spread across 12 chiplets, each 72 mm². Despite having fewer total transistors, the 9634 uses more chiplets, which aligns with its higher per-core clock potential and larger L3 cache.

Cache configurations are a major architectural divergence. Both have 64 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core. The L3 cache differs substantially: the 9734 has 256 MB shared, while the 9634 has 384 MB shared. That 128 MB difference in L3 cache likely contributes to the 9634's stronger performance in physics and single-threaded tests, where larger cache hierarchies reduce memory latency penalties.

The core counts and clock speeds reflect the architectural trade-off. The 9734's 112 cores run at a 2.20 GHz base clock and 3.00 GHz boost clock. The 9634's 84 cores run at a 2.25 GHz base clock and 3.70 GHz boost clock. The 9734 trades clock speed for core density, while the 9634 trades core count for higher frequencies. Both parts use the same AMD Socket SP5 and share identical memory and PCIe capabilities: DDR5, twelve-channel memory bus, 460.8 GB/s bandwidth, and Gen 5 with 128 lanes (CPU only).

Neither processor includes integrated graphics, and both are locked multipliers. Both are marked as Active in production status. The release dates differ: the 9634 launched on 2022-11-09, while the 9734 launched on 2023-06-12.

Specification Differences

The specification table highlights where these two EPYC processors diverge. The most obvious difference is core count: 112 cores and 224 threads for the 9734 versus 84 cores and 168 threads for the 9634. That is 28 additional cores and 56 additional threads for the Bergamo part.

Clock speeds favor the 9634. The base clock is 2.25 GHz versus 2.20 GHz, a modest edge. The boost clock is a more significant 3.70 GHz versus 3.00 GHz, a 0.70 GHz advantage that explains the single-thread performance gap.

TDP favors the 9634. It draws 290 W versus 340 W for the 9734, a 50 W difference despite having fewer cores. The higher TDP of the 9734 is the cost of feeding 112 cores.

Cache favors the 9634 in L3. The 9634 has 384 MB shared L3, while the 9734 has 256 MB shared L3. L1 and L2 are identical at 64 KB per core and 1 MB per core respectively.

Transistor count and die size differ. The 9734 has 71,000 million transistors on 8x 73 mm² chiplets. The 9634 has 78,840 million transistors on 12x 72 mm² chiplets. The 9634 uses more chiplets and more total transistors despite fewer cores.

The launch MSRP for the 9734 is $9600. The launch MSRP for the 9634 is $10304. Both are server/workstation parts with Active production status, locked multipliers, and no integrated graphics.

Everything else matches: AMD Socket SP5, Zen 4 architecture, 5 nm process, TSMC foundry, DDR5 memory, twelve-channel memory bus, 460.8 GB/s memory bandwidth, ECC support, Gen 5 PCIe with 128 lanes (CPU only), and EPYC 9004 series branding.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark suite splits cleanly into two camps. The EPYC 9634 wins every Cinebench test by exactly 5.2%. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 9634 scores 9248 versus 8763. In R15 single-core, it scores 1305 versus 1237. The pattern holds for R20 multi-core (38535 versus 36516), R20 single-core (5440 versus 5155), R23 multi-core (91752 versus 86943), and R23 single-core (12953 versus 12274). This uniform 5.2% delta across both single and multi-threaded Cinebench tests suggests the 9634's higher boost clock provides a consistent per-core advantage that its 28 fewer cores cannot overcome in this workload.

The PassMark multithread test shows the same 5.2% margin in favor of the 9634: 107944 versus 102286. This is the most surprising result in the entire comparison. Despite having 28 more cores, the 9734 cannot beat the 9634 in a general multithreaded workload. The 9634's 3.70 GHz boost clock appears to compensate fully for the core deficit.

The PassMark physics test is the largest single victory for the 9634. It scores 12291 versus 6747, a 45.1% lead. This test rewards per-core efficiency and cache performance, and the 9634's 384 MB L3 cache plus higher clock speed delivers a dominant result.

The PassMark single-thread tests consolidate the 9634's advantage. Both passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread record 2924 for the 9634 and 2310 for the 9734, a 21% lead. This is the second-largest margin in the comparison and reinforces the clock speed story.

The EPYC 9734 fights back in data-heavy parallel workloads. Its largest win is PassMark floating point math: 549045 versus 353784, a 55.2% lead. This is the single biggest delta in either direction across the entire benchmark suite. Extended instructions follow closely: 205925 versus 137543, a 49.7% lead. Random string sorting shows a 37% advantage (357638 versus 261134). Data compression delivers a 29.7% lead (2900008 versus 2236412). Data encryption comes in at 18.1% (179390 versus 151943). Integer math rounds out the 9734's wins at 13.5% (823150 versus 725356).

The passmark_find_prime_numbers test is the only anomaly. The 9634 wins with 1176 versus 829, a 29.5% lead. This test typically scales with core count, but the 9734's lower clock speed and different cache topology result in a significant loss.

The overall win tally is 11 for the 9634 and 6 for the 9734. However, the average benchmark scores tell a nuanced story. The 9734's average of 310,619 is higher than the 9634's 244,274, driven by the enormous scores in compression, floating point, and extended instructions. Both CPUs sit in the 99th percentile versus all CPUs. The 9734's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 9575F (delta of -0.4%), Intel Xeon 6781P (-1.6%), and AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX (-3.2%). The 9634's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6747P (delta of 2.5%) and Intel Xeon 6980P (-2.9%). The data indicates the 9734 competes in a higher performance tier overall, but the 9634 wins the majority of head-to-head tests.