EPYC 4564P vs A8-4500M
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 4564P outperforms A8-4500M by a whopping 3696% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2748 | 115 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 62.13 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | AMD A-Series | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.17 | 9.14 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | no data | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Trinity (2012−2013) | Raphael (2023−2025) |
| Release date | 15 May 2012 (13 years ago) | 21 May 2024 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $699 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of A8-4500M and EPYC 4564P: 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 32 |
| Base clock speed | 1.9 GHz | 4.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 5.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 192 KB | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 64 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 5 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 2x 71 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 47 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 13,140 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on A8-4500M 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 | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | FS1r2 | AM5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 170 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-4500M and EPYC 4564P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMA | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-4500M and EPYC 4564P are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-4500M and EPYC 4564P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | unknown | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon HD 7640G (496 - 685 MHz) | AMD Radeon Graphics |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-4500M and EPYC 4564P.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 28 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.97 | 36.82 |
| Integrated graphics card | 1.07 | 1.83 |
| Recency | 15 May 2012 | 21 May 2024 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 16 |
| Threads | 4 | 32 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 170 Watt |
A8-4500M has 386% lower power consumption.
EPYC 4564P, on the other hand, has a 3696% higher aggregate performance score, 71% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 12 years, 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 540% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD EPYC 4564P is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD A8-4500M in performance tests.
Be aware that A8-4500M is a notebook processor while EPYC 4564P is a server/workstation one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
