EPYC 9354 vs Apple M1 Pro
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 9354 outperforms M1 Pro by a whopping 329% 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 | 913 | 78 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 11.90 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | Apple M-Series | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | no data | 16.04 |
| Designer | Apple | AMD |
| Manufacturer | no data | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | no data | Genoa (2022−2023) |
| Release date | 18 October 2021 (4 years ago) | 10 November 2022 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $3,420 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
M1 Pro and EPYC 9354 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 | 10 (Deca-Core) | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) |
| Threads | 10 | 64 |
| Base clock speed | 2.064 GHz | 3.25 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.22 GHz | 3.8 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 32.5 |
| L1 cache | 2.9 MB | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 28 MB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 24 MB | 256 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 5 nm, 6 nm |
| Die size | no data | 8x 72 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 33700 Million | 52,560 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on M1 Pro and EPYC 9354 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 | no data | 2 |
| Socket | no data | SP5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 28 MB + 24 MB | 280 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by M1 Pro and EPYC 9354. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by M1 Pro and EPYC 9354 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by M1 Pro and EPYC 9354. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR5-4800 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 6 TiB |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 460.8 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Apple M1 Pro 16-Core GPU | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by M1 Pro and EPYC 9354.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 128 |
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 | 9.76 | 41.90 |
| Recency | 18 October 2021 | 10 November 2022 |
| Physical cores | 10 | 32 |
| Threads | 10 | 64 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 28 Watt | 280 Watt |
Apple M1 Pro has 900% lower power consumption.
EPYC 9354, on the other hand, has a 329.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 220% more physical cores and 540% more threads.
The AMD EPYC 9354 is our recommended choice as it beats the Apple M1 Pro in performance tests.
Be aware that Apple M1 Pro is a notebook processor while EPYC 9354 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.
