Core Ultra 5 225H vs EPYC 7303

CPU

GPU

Core Ultra 5 225H

14 Cores14 Thrd20 WWMax: 4.9 GHz2025

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 7303

16 Cores32 Thrd130 WWMax: 3.4 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core Ultra 5 225H

14 / 14

28,802

+0.8%

28,572

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Core Ultra 5 225H

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +46.0% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 20W instead of 130W, a 110W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA2049 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc 130T GPU, while EPYC 7303 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (14,526 vs 18,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7303, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

EPYC 7303

2023

Why buy it

✅+23.9% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
✅+255.6% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 18 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 28.
✅357.1% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 28) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 5 225H across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌550% higher power demand at 130W vs 20W.
❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 5 225H moves to FCBGA2049 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 5 225H can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core Ultra 5 225H

2025

EPYC 7303

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +46.0% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 20W instead of 130W, a 110W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA2049 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc 130T GPU, while EPYC 7303 needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅+23.9% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
✅+255.6% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 18 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 28.
✅357.1% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 28) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (14,526 vs 18,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7303, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 5 225H across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌550% higher power demand at 130W vs 20W.
❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 5 225H moves to FCBGA2049 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 5 225H can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 5 225H better than EPYC 7303?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 7303 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core Ultra 5 225H is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 7303 is the better fit. You are getting 23.9% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 255.6% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 18 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core Ultra 5 225H still looks like the safer overall buy. Core Ultra 5 225H is at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you a 46.0% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core Ultra 5 225H is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2023) and a healthier platform with FCBGA2049 and DDR5 instead of SP3. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core Ultra 5 225H Benchmark Check

EPYC 7303 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core Ultra 5 225H	EPYC 7303
1080p
low	299 FPS	159 FPS
medium	262 FPS	130 FPS
high	218 FPS	109 FPS
ultra	187 FPS	86 FPS
1440p
low	245 FPS	141 FPS
medium	193 FPS	113 FPS
high	157 FPS	89 FPS
ultra	138 FPS	71 FPS
4K
low	168 FPS	68 FPS
medium	134 FPS	57 FPS
high	104 FPS	45 FPS
ultra	90 FPS	37 FPS

Open Core Ultra 5 225H Open EPYC 7303

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core Ultra 5 225H	EPYC 7303
1080p
low	685 FPS	390 FPS
medium	543 FPS	346 FPS
high	432 FPS	283 FPS
ultra	385 FPS	225 FPS
1440p
low	566 FPS	329 FPS
medium	471 FPS	297 FPS
high	385 FPS	251 FPS
ultra	327 FPS	192 FPS
4K
low	349 FPS	203 FPS
medium	293 FPS	186 FPS
high	267 FPS	158 FPS
ultra	233 FPS	127 FPS

Open Core Ultra 5 225H Open EPYC 7303

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core Ultra 5 225H	EPYC 7303
1080p
low	720 FPS	644 FPS
medium	720 FPS	526 FPS
high	720 FPS	469 FPS
ultra	653 FPS	411 FPS
1440p
low	720 FPS	499 FPS
medium	720 FPS	406 FPS
high	624 FPS	356 FPS
ultra	537 FPS	310 FPS
4K
low	628 FPS	368 FPS
medium	519 FPS	286 FPS
high	458 FPS	244 FPS
ultra	383 FPS	197 FPS

Open Core Ultra 5 225H Open EPYC 7303

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core Ultra 5 225H	EPYC 7303
1080p
low	720 FPS	714 FPS
medium	720 FPS	714 FPS
high	720 FPS	696 FPS
ultra	720 FPS	610 FPS
1440p
low	720 FPS	696 FPS
medium	720 FPS	608 FPS
high	677 FPS	521 FPS
ultra	579 FPS	446 FPS
4K
low	604 FPS	498 FPS
medium	538 FPS	445 FPS
high	486 FPS	390 FPS
ultra	423 FPS	337 FPS

Open Core Ultra 5 225H Open EPYC 7303

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core Ultra 5 225H and EPYC 7303

Core Ultra 5 225H

The Core Ultra 5 225H is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-H (2025) architecture. It features 14 cores and 14 threads. Base frequency is 4.3 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 18 MB. Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2049. Thermal design power (TDP): 20 MB + 18 MB. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 28,802 points. Launch price was $385.

EPYC 7303

The EPYC 7303 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 5 September 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Milan (2021−2023) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 28,572 points. Launch price was $604.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 5 225H packs 14 cores / 14 threads, while the EPYC 7303 offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the EPYC 7303 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core Ultra 5 225H versus 3.4 GHz on the EPYC 7303 — a 36.1% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 5 225H (base: 4.3 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Core Ultra 5 225H uses the Arrow Lake-H (2025) architecture (5 nm), while the EPYC 7303 uses Milan (2021−2023) (7 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 5 225H scores 28,802 against the EPYC 7303's 28,572 — a 0.8% lead for the Core Ultra 5 225H. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 14,526 vs 18,000 (21.4% advantage for the EPYC 7303). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,678 vs 1,960, a 31% lead for the Core Ultra 5 225H that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 12,337 vs 11,000 (11.5% advantage for the Core Ultra 5 225H). L3 cache: 18 MB on the Core Ultra 5 225H vs 64 MB (total) on the EPYC 7303.

Feature	Core Ultra 5 225H	EPYC 7303
Cores / Threads	14 / 14	16 / 32+14%
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz+44%	3.4 GHz
Base Clock	4.3 GHz+79%	2.4 GHz
L3 Cache	18 MB	64 MB (total)+256%
L2 Cache	—	512 kB (per core)
Process	5 nm-29%	7 nm
Architecture	Arrow Lake-H (2025)	Milan (2021−2023)
PassMark	28,802	28,572
Cinebench R23 Multi	14,526	18,000+24%
Geekbench 6 Single	2,678+37%	1,960
Geekbench 6 Multi	12,337+12%	11,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 5 225H uses the FCBGA2049 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 7303 uses SP3 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6400 on the Core Ultra 5 225H versus DDR4-3200 on the EPYC 7303 — the Core Ultra 5 225H supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7303 supports up to 204 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 45.8% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core Ultra 5 225H) vs 8 (EPYC 7303). PCIe lanes: 28 (Core Ultra 5 225H) vs 128 (EPYC 7303) — the EPYC 7303 offers 100 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: WM880,HM870 (Core Ultra 5 225H) and SP3 platform (EPYC 7303).

Feature	Core Ultra 5 225H	EPYC 7303
Socket	FCBGA2049	SP3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6400+25%	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	204 GB+59%
RAM Channels	2	8+300%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	28	128+357%

🔧

Advanced Features

Both processors feature an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 5 225H) vs AMD-V, SVM (EPYC 7303). The Core Ultra 5 225H includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc 130T GPU), while the EPYC 7303 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core Ultra 5 225H targets Professional Content Creation Laptop, EPYC 7303 targets High-frequency Server Workloads. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 5 225H rivals Ryzen 7 9800H; EPYC 7303 rivals Xeon Gold 6334.

Feature	Core Ultra 5 225H	EPYC 7303
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Intel Arc 130T GPU	—
Unlocked	Yes	Yes
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V, SVM
Target Use	Professional Content Creation Laptop	High-frequency Server Workloads