EPYC 9384X vs EPYC 4584PX

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 4584PX and EPYC 9384X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking80not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation53.61no data
Market segmentServerServer
Power efficiency29.86no data
Architecture codenameRaphael (2023−2024)Genoa-X (2023)
Release date21 May 2024 (less than a year ago)13 June 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$699$5,529

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

EPYC 4584PX and EPYC 9384X 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 cores16 (Hexadeca-Core)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads3264
Base clock speed4.2 GHz3.1 GHz
Boost clock speed5.7 GHz3.9 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache128 MB (shared)768 MB (shared)
Chip lithography5 nm5 nm
Die size2x 71 mm28x 72 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)47 °Cno data
Number of transistors17,840 million90,160 million
64 bit support++

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 4584PX and EPYC 9384X 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 configuration12
SocketAM5SP5
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt320 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 4584PX and EPYC 9384X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX++
Precision Boost 2++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 4584PX and EPYC 9384X are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 4584PX and EPYC 9384X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR5DDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon GraphicsN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 4584PX and EPYC 9384X.

PCIe version5.05.0
PCI Express lanes28128

Pros & cons summary


Recency 21 May 2024 13 June 2023
Physical cores 16 32
Threads 32 64
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 320 Watt

EPYC 4584PX has an age advantage of 11 months, and 166.7% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9384X, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

We couldn't decide between EPYC 4584PX and EPYC 9384X. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 4584PX and EPYC 9384X, 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 4584PX
EPYC 4584PX
AMD EPYC 9384X
EPYC 9384X

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.


4.2 5 votes

Rate EPYC 4584PX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 9384X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 4584PX or EPYC 9384X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.