EPYC 4464P vs U300
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 4464P outperforms U300 by a whopping 483% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing U300 and EPYC 4464P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1193 | 135 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 69.97 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Power efficiency | 9.02 | 27.53 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Raphael (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 1 January 2023 (1 year ago) | 21 May 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $399 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
U300 and EPYC 4464P 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 cores | 5 (Penta-Core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 6 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.4 GHz | 5.4 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8 MB Intel® Smart Cache | 32 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | Intel 7 nm | 5 nm |
| Die size | no data | 2x 71 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 61 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 13,140 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on U300 and EPYC 4464P 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | FCBGA1744 | AM5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 105 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by U300 and EPYC 4464P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Speed Shift | + | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
| Deep Learning Boost | + | - |
Security technologies
U300 and EPYC 4464P technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | no data |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by U300 and EPYC 4464P are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by U300 and EPYC 4464P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5-5200, DDR4-3200, LPDDR4x-4267 | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 96 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel UHD Graphics for 13th Gen Intel Processors | AMD Radeon Graphics |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.1 GHz | no data |
| Execution Units | 48 | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of U300 and EPYC 4464P integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 4 | no data |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by U300 and EPYC 4464P integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | 4096 x 2304 @ 60Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over eDP | 4096 x 2304 @ 120Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | 7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by U300 and EPYC 4464P integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | 12.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by U300 and EPYC 4464P.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 20 | 28 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 5.24 | 30.54 |
| Integrated graphics card | 5.58 | 1.98 |
| Recency | 1 January 2023 | 21 May 2024 |
| Physical cores | 5 | 12 |
| Threads | 6 | 24 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 105 Watt |
U300 has 181.8% faster integrated GPU, and 90.9% lower power consumption.
EPYC 4464P, on the other hand, has a 482.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 140% more physical cores and 300% more threads.
The EPYC 4464P is our recommended choice as it beats the U300 in performance tests.
Be aware that U300 is a notebook processor while EPYC 4464P is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between U300 and EPYC 4464P, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
