Ultra 9 285K vs EPYC 7402

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7402
2019
24 cores / 48 threads, 180 Watt
28.97
Core Ultra 9 285K
2024
24 cores / 24 threads, 125 Watt
43.06
+48.6%

Core Ultra 9 285K outperforms EPYC 7402 by a considerable 49% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7402 and Core Ultra 9 285K processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking15553
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation10.5474.28
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesAMD EPYCno data
Power efficiency15.1532.43
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2017−2020)Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
Release date7 August 2019 (5 years ago)24 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,783$589

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ultra 9 285K has 605% better value for money than EPYC 7402.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7402 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 cores24 (Tetracosa-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads4824
Base clock speed2.8 GHz3.7 GHz
Boost clock speed3.35 GHz5.7 GHz
Bus rateno data250 MHz
Multiplier28no data
L1 cache96K (per core)112 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)3 MB (per core)
L3 cache128 MB (shared)36 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm, 14 nm3 nm
Die size192 mm2243 mm2
Number of transistors4,800 million17,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7402 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 configuration2 (Multiprocessor)1
SocketTR41851
Power consumption (TDP)180 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7402 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 7402 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 7402 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 7402 and Core Ultra 9 285K. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Eight-channelDDR5 Depends on motherboard
Maximum memory size4 TiBno data
Max memory channels8no data
Maximum memory bandwidth204.763 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataArc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7402 and Core Ultra 9 285K.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data20

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 7402 28.97
Ultra 9 285K 43.06
+48.6%

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 7402 46012
Ultra 9 285K 68403
+48.7%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 28.97 43.06
Recency 7 August 2019 24 October 2024
Threads 48 24
Chip lithography 7 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 180 Watt 125 Watt

EPYC 7402 has 100% more threads.

Ultra 9 285K, on the other hand, has a 48.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 44% lower power consumption.

The Core Ultra 9 285K is our recommended choice as it beats the EPYC 7402 in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 7402 is a server/workstation processor while Core Ultra 9 285K is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7402 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 7402
EPYC 7402
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.


4.1 11 votes

Rate EPYC 7402 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 159 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 7402 or Core Ultra 9 285K, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.