EPYC 4564P vs Xeon Max 9462
Primary details
Comparing Xeon Max 9462 and EPYC 4564P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 72 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 53.48 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Power efficiency | no data | 21.75 |
| Architecture codename | Sapphire Rapids HBM (2023) | Raphael (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 10 January 2023 (1 year ago) | 21 May 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $7,995 | $699 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Xeon Max 9462 and EPYC 4564P 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 | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 64 | 32 |
| Base clock speed | 2.7 GHz | 4.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 5.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 80K (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 2 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 75 MB | 64 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 5 nm |
| Die size | 4x 477 mm2 | 2x 71 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 77 °C | 47 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 13,140 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon Max 9462 and EPYC 4564P 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 | 2 | 1 |
| Socket | 4677 | AM5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 170 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Max 9462 and EPYC 4564P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| TSX | + | - |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Xeon Max 9462 and EPYC 4564P technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon Max 9462 and EPYC 4564P are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon Max 9462 and EPYC 4564P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5-4800 | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon Graphics |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Max 9462 and EPYC 4564P.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 80 | 28 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 10 January 2023 | 21 May 2024 |
| Physical cores | 32 | 16 |
| Threads | 64 | 32 |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 170 Watt |
Xeon Max 9462 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
EPYC 4564P, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 105.9% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Xeon Max 9462 and EPYC 4564P. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Max 9462 and EPYC 4564P, 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.
