EPYC 9645 vs EPYC 8324P

VS

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 8324P and EPYC 9645 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking101not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation17.49no data
Market segmentServerServer
Power efficiency18.91no data
Architecture codenameSiena (2023−2024)Turin (2024)
Release date18 September 2023 (1 year ago)10 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,895$11,048

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

EPYC 8324P and EPYC 9645 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 cores32 (Dotriaconta-Core)96
Threads64192
Base clock speed2.65 GHz2.3 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz3.7 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)80 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache128 MB (shared)256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography5 nm3 nm
Die size4x 73 mm2no data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)75 °Cno data
Number of transistors35,500 millionno data
64 bit support++

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 8324P and EPYC 9645 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 configuration12
SocketSP6SP5
Power consumption (TDP)180 Watt320 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 8324P and EPYC 9645. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX++
Precision Boost 2++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 8324P and EPYC 9645 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 8324P and EPYC 9645. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR5DDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/AN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 8324P and EPYC 9645.

PCIe version5.05.0
PCI Express lanes96128

Pros & cons summary


Recency 18 September 2023 10 October 2024
Physical cores 32 96
Threads 64 192
Chip lithography 5 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 180 Watt 320 Watt

EPYC 8324P has 77.8% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9645, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, 200% more physical cores and 200% more threads, and a 66.7% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between EPYC 8324P and EPYC 9645. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 8324P and EPYC 9645, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD EPYC 8324P
EPYC 8324P
AMD EPYC 9645
EPYC 9645

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 8324P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 9645 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 8324P or EPYC 9645, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.