Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G vs EPYC 8324P
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 8324P outperforms Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G by a whopping 569% 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 | 151 | 1379 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 18.81 | 3.94 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | AMD Ryzen 5 |
| Power efficiency | 7.63 | 3.16 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |
| Architecture codename | Siena (2023−2024) | Raven Ridge (2017−2019) |
| Release date | 18 September 2023 (2 years ago) | 10 May 2018 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $1,895 | $169 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
EPYC 8324P has 377% better value for money than Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
EPYC 8324P and Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G 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 | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 64 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 2.65 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 36 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 384 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | 128 MB (shared) | 4 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 4x 73 mm2 | 209.78 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 75 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 35,500 million | 4950 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 8324P and Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G 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 | SP6 | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 8324P and Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G. 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 Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 8324P and Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR4 Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 46.933 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 8324P and Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 96 | 12 |
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 | 32.43 | 4.85 |
| Recency | 18 September 2023 | 10 May 2018 |
| Physical cores | 32 | 4 |
| Threads | 64 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 65 Watt |
EPYC 8324P has a 568.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, 700% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.
Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G, on the other hand, has 176.9% lower power consumption.
The AMD EPYC 8324P is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G in performance tests.
Be aware that EPYC 8324P is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G 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.
