Xeon E-2234 vs EPYC 4345P
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 4345P outperforms Xeon E-2234 by a whopping 298% 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 | 262 | 1236 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 60.51 | 22.15 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | no data | Intel Xeon E |
| Power efficiency | 34.77 | 8.00 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Grado (2025) | Coffee Lake-S WS (2018−2019) |
| Release date | 13 May 2025 (recently) | 29 May 2019 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $329 | $250 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
EPYC 4345P has 173% better value for money than Xeon E-2234.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
EPYC 4345P and Xeon E-2234 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 | 8 (Octa-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 16 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.5 GHz | 4.8 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 3.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 36 |
| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 256 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 32 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 70.6 mm2 | 126 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 8,315 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 4345P and Xeon E-2234 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 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | AM5 | FCLGA1151 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 71 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 4345P and Xeon E-2234. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Security technologies
EPYC 4345P and Xeon E-2234 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| MPX | - | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 4345P and Xeon E-2234 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 EPYC 4345P and Xeon E-2234. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR4-2666 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 42.671 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon Graphics | Intel UHD Graphics P630 |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by EPYC 4345P and Xeon E-2234 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | N/A |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | N/A |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | N/A |
| Max resolution over VGA | no data | N/A |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by EPYC 4345P and Xeon E-2234 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | N/A |
| OpenGL | no data | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 4345P and Xeon E-2234.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 24 | 16 |
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.
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 | 23.43 | 5.89 |
| Integrated graphics card | 1.92 | 6.20 |
| Recency | 13 May 2025 | 29 May 2019 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 4 |
| Threads | 16 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 71 Watt |
EPYC 4345P has a 297.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 9.2% lower power consumption.
Xeon E-2234, on the other hand, has 222.9% faster integrated GPU.
The AMD EPYC 4345P is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Xeon E-2234 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
