Ultra 5 250KF Plus vs EPYC 9455
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 9455 outperforms Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus by a whopping 130% 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 | 26 | 249 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 6.25 | 96.10 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 8.86 | 9.26 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Turin (2024) | Arrow Lake Refresh (2026) |
| Release date | 10 October 2024 (1 year ago) | 11 March 2026 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $5,412 | $184 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 1438% better value for money than EPYC 9455.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of EPYC 9455 and Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus: 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 | 48 (Octatetraconta-Core) | 18 (Octadeca-Core) |
| Performance-cores | no data | 6 |
| Efficient-cores | no data | 12 |
| Threads | 96 | 18 |
| Base clock speed | 3.15 GHz | 4.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.4 GHz | 5.3 GHz |
| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 192 MB (shared) | 30 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 3 nm |
| Die size | 6x 70.6 mm2 | 243 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 49,890 million | 17,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 9455 and Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus 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 | 2 | 1 |
| Socket | SP5 | FCLGA1851 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 300 Watt | 125 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 9455 and Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. 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 | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| SIPP | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
| Supported AI Software Frameworks | - | OpenVINO™, WindowsML, DirectML, ONNX RT, WebNN |
Security technologies
EPYC 9455 and Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 9455 and Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus 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 9455 and Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR5-7200 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 256 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 9455 and Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 5.0 and 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 128 | 24 |
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 | 64.76 | 28.20 |
| Recency | 10 October 2024 | 11 March 2026 |
| Physical cores | 48 | 18 |
| Threads | 96 | 18 |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 300 Watt | 125 Watt |
EPYC 9455 has a 130% higher aggregate performance score, and 167% more physical cores and 433% more threads.
Ultra 5 250KF Plus, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 33% more advanced lithography process, and 140% lower power consumption.
The AMD EPYC 9455 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus in performance tests.
Be aware that EPYC 9455 is a server/workstation processor while Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus 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.
