Ultra 5 225F vs EPYC 9754
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 9754 outperforms Core Ultra 5 225F by a whopping 232% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing EPYC 9754 and Core Ultra 5 225F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 14 | 311 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.12 | 65.03 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 16.85 | 28.14 |
| Architecture codename | Bergamo (2023) | Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) |
| Release date | 13 June 2023 (1 year ago) | 7 January 2025 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $11,900 | $231 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ultra 5 225F has 5706% better value for money than EPYC 9754.
Detailed specifications
EPYC 9754 and Core Ultra 5 225F 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 | 128 | 10 (Deca-Core) |
| Performance-cores | no data | 6 |
| Efficient-cores | no data | 4 |
| Threads | 256 | 10 |
| Base clock speed | 2.25 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.1 GHz | 4.9 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 256 MB (shared) | 20 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 3 nm |
| Die size | 8x 73 mm2 | 243 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 71,000 million | 17,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 9754 and Core Ultra 5 225F 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) | 360 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 9754 and Core Ultra 5 225F. 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 | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
| Supported AI Software Frameworks | - | OpenVINO™, WindowsML, DirectML, ONNX RT, WebNN |
Security technologies
EPYC 9754 and Core Ultra 5 225F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 9754 and Core Ultra 5 225F 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 9754 and Core Ultra 5 225F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR5-6400 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 192 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 9754 and Core Ultra 5 225F.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 5.0 and 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 128 | 20 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 63.75 | 19.22 |
| Recency | 13 June 2023 | 7 January 2025 |
| Physical cores | 128 | 10 |
| Threads | 256 | 10 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 360 Watt | 65 Watt |
EPYC 9754 has a 231.7% higher aggregate performance score, and 1180% more physical cores and 2460% more threads.
Ultra 5 225F, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 66.7% more advanced lithography process, and 453.8% lower power consumption.
The EPYC 9754 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core Ultra 5 225F in performance tests.
Be aware that EPYC 9754 is a server/workstation processor while Core Ultra 5 225F 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.
