Ryzen 9 7840HX vs EPYC 4464P
Primary details
Comparing EPYC 4464P and Ryzen 9 7840HX processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 134 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 69.91 | no data |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Series | no data | AMD Dragon Range (Zen 4, Ryzen 7045) |
| Power efficiency | 27.53 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Raphael (2023−2024) | Dragon Range-HX (Zen 4) (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 21 May 2024 (less than a year ago) | 17 January 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $399 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
EPYC 4464P and Ryzen 9 7840HX 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 | 12 (Dodeca-Core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 24 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 2.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.4 GHz | 5.1 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 768 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 12 MB |
| L3 cache | 32 MB (shared) | 64 MB |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 5 nm |
| Die size | 2x 71 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 61 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 13,140 million | 9900 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 4464P and Ryzen 9 7840HX 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 | no data |
| Socket | AM5 | FL1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 55 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 4464P and Ryzen 9 7840HX. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 4464P and Ryzen 9 7840HX are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 4464P and Ryzen 9 7840HX. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon Graphics | AMD Radeon 610M (400 - 2200 MHz) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 4464P and Ryzen 9 7840HX.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 28 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Integrated graphics card | 1.98 | 2.85 |
| Recency | 21 May 2024 | 17 January 2024 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 105 Watt | 55 Watt |
EPYC 4464P has an age advantage of 4 months.
Ryzen 9 7840HX, on the other hand, has 43.9% faster integrated GPU, and 90.9% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between EPYC 4464P and Ryzen 9 7840HX. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that EPYC 4464P is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 9 7840HX is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 4464P and Ryzen 9 7840HX, 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.
