7 253PQE vs EPYC 4564P
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 4564P outperforms Core 7 253PQE by an impressive 55% 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 | 123 | 302 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 36.53 | 33.48 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 9.14 | no data |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Raphael (2023−2025) | Bartlett Lake (2025−2026) |
| Release date | 21 May 2024 (2 years ago) | 9 March 2026 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $699 | $409 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
EPYC 4564P has 9% better value for money than 7 253PQE.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of EPYC 4564P and Core 7 253PQE: 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 | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 10 (Deca-Core) |
| Threads | 32 | 20 |
| Base clock speed | 4.5 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.7 GHz | 5.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 64 MB (shared) | 33 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 2x 71 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 47 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 13,140 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 4564P and Core 7 253PQE 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 | AM5 | 1700 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 170 Watt | 125 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 4564P and Core 7 253PQE. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Security technologies
EPYC 4564P and Core 7 253PQE technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 4564P and Core 7 253PQE 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 EPYC 4564P and Core 7 253PQE. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon Graphics | Intel UHD Graphics 770 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 4564P and Core 7 253PQE.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 28 | 20 |
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 | 37.24 | 24.08 |
| Integrated graphics card | 1.85 | 5.75 |
| Recency | 21 May 2024 | 9 March 2026 |
| Physical cores | 16 | 10 |
| Threads | 32 | 20 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 170 Watt | 125 Watt |
EPYC 4564P has a 55% higher aggregate performance score, 60% more physical cores and 60% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
7 253PQE, on the other hand, has 211% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 1 year, and 36% lower power consumption.
The AMD EPYC 4564P is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Core 7 253PQE in performance tests.
Be aware that EPYC 4564P is a server/workstation processor while Core 7 253PQE is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
