Ultra 9 285K vs EPYC 4484PX

VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 4484PX
2024
12 cores / 24 threads, 120 Watt
32.18
Core Ultra 9 285K
2024
24 cores / 24 threads, 125 Watt
43.07
+33.8%

Core Ultra 9 285K outperforms EPYC 4484PX by a substantial 34% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 4484PX and Core Ultra 9 285K processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking12653
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation50.2674.33
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
Power efficiency25.3832.61
Architecture codenameRaphael (2023−2024)Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
Release date21 May 2024 (less than a year ago)24 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599$589

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ultra 9 285K has 48% better value for money than EPYC 4484PX.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 4484PX and Core Ultra 9 285K basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores12 (Dodeca-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads2424
Base clock speed4.4 GHz3.7 GHz
Boost clock speed5.6 GHz5.7 GHz
Bus rateno data250 MHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)112 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)3 MB (per core)
L3 cache128 MB (shared)36 MB (shared)
Chip lithography5 nm3 nm
Die size2x 71 mm2243 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)47 °Cno data
Number of transistors17,840 million17,800 million
64 bit support++
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 4484PX and Core Ultra 9 285K compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketAM51851
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 4484PX and Core Ultra 9 285K. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX++
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
TSX-+
Precision Boost 2+no data

Security technologies

EPYC 4484PX and Core Ultra 9 285K technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 4484PX and Core Ultra 9 285K are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 4484PX and Core Ultra 9 285K. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR5DDR5 Depends on motherboard

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon GraphicsArc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 4484PX and Core Ultra 9 285K.

PCIe version5.05.0
PCI Express lanes2820

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

EPYC 4484PX 32.18
Ultra 9 285K 43.07
+33.8%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

EPYC 4484PX 51115
Ultra 9 285K 68422
+33.9%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 32.18 43.07
Recency 21 May 2024 24 October 2024
Physical cores 12 24
Chip lithography 5 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 125 Watt

EPYC 4484PX has 4.2% lower power consumption.

Ultra 9 285K, on the other hand, has a 33.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 months, 100% more physical cores, and a 66.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Core Ultra 9 285K is our recommended choice as it beats the EPYC 4484PX in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 4484PX is a server/workstation processor while Core Ultra 9 285K is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 4484PX and Core Ultra 9 285K, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD EPYC 4484PX
EPYC 4484PX
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K
Core Ultra 9 285K

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3 2 votes

Rate EPYC 4484PX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 167 votes

Rate Core Ultra 9 285K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 4484PX or Core Ultra 9 285K, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.