Core Ultra 5 238V
Popular choices:
EPYC 4124P
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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 238V
2024Why buy it
- ✅Draws 17W instead of 65W, a 48W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4124P across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (10,000 vs 10,500).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 32 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 4124P, which brings 4 cores / 8 threads and 28 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $454 MSRP, while EPYC 4124P mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
EPYC 4124P
2024Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +18.2% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+300% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 8 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 8 threads, plus 28 PCIe lanes vs 8.
- ✅250% more PCIe lanes (28 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌282.4% higher power demand at 65W vs 17W.
Core Ultra 5 238V
2024EPYC 4124P
2024Why buy it
- ✅Draws 17W instead of 65W, a 48W reduction.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +18.2% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+300% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 8 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 8 threads, plus 28 PCIe lanes vs 8.
- ✅250% more PCIe lanes (28 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4124P across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (10,000 vs 10,500).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 32 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 4124P, which brings 4 cores / 8 threads and 28 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $454 MSRP, while EPYC 4124P mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Trade-offs
- ❌282.4% higher power demand at 65W vs 17W.
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 4124P better than Core Ultra 5 238V?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
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.
Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core Ultra 5 238V | EPYC 4124P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 180 FPS | 245 FPS |
| medium | 147 FPS | 227 FPS |
| high | 120 FPS | 196 FPS |
| ultra | 98 FPS | 169 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 148 FPS | 217 FPS |
| medium | 118 FPS | 181 FPS |
| high | 96 FPS | 150 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 132 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 83 FPS | 151 FPS |
| medium | 71 FPS | 127 FPS |
| high | 57 FPS | 98 FPS |
| ultra | 45 FPS | 85 FPS |
Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core Ultra 5 238V | EPYC 4124P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 212 FPS | 453 FPS |
| medium | 176 FPS | 417 FPS |
| high | 158 FPS | 349 FPS |
| ultra | 139 FPS | 308 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 181 FPS | 430 FPS |
| medium | 154 FPS | 368 FPS |
| high | 142 FPS | 311 FPS |
| ultra | 122 FPS | 264 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 137 FPS | 246 FPS |
| medium | 122 FPS | 216 FPS |
| high | 115 FPS | 189 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 160 FPS |
League of Legends
| Preset | Core Ultra 5 238V | EPYC 4124P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| medium | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| high | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| ultra | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| medium | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| high | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| ultra | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| medium | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| high | 404 FPS | 403 FPS |
| ultra | 336 FPS | 338 FPS |
Valorant
| Preset | Core Ultra 5 238V | EPYC 4124P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| medium | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| high | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| ultra | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| medium | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| high | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| ultra | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| medium | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| high | 455 FPS | 453 FPS |
| ultra | 418 FPS | 434 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core Ultra 5 238V and EPYC 4124P
Core Ultra 5 238V
Core Ultra 5 238V
The Core Ultra 5 238V is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 September 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Lunar Lake (2024) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 4.7 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 2.5 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2833. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 18,219 points. Launch price was $299.
EPYC 4124P
EPYC 4124P
The EPYC 4124P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 21 May 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Raphael (2023−2025) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: AM5. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 18,139 points. Launch price was $149.
Processing Power
The Core Ultra 5 238V packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the EPYC 4124P offers 4 cores / 8 threads — the Core Ultra 5 238V has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.7 GHz on the Core Ultra 5 238V versus 5.1 GHz on the EPYC 4124P — a 8.2% clock advantage for the EPYC 4124P (base: 2.1 GHz vs 3.8 GHz). The Core Ultra 5 238V uses the Lunar Lake (2024) architecture (3 nm), while the EPYC 4124P uses Raphael (2023−2025) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 5 238V scores 18,219 against the EPYC 4124P's 18,139 — a 0.4% lead for the Core Ultra 5 238V. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 10,000 vs 10,500 (4.9% advantage for the EPYC 4124P). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,683 vs 1,962, a 31% lead for the Core Ultra 5 238V that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 10,130 vs 1,898 (136.9% advantage for the Core Ultra 5 238V). L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 5 238V vs 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 4124P.
| Feature | Core Ultra 5 238V | EPYC 4124P |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 8 / 8+100% | 4 / 8 |
| Boost Clock | 4.7 GHz | 5.1 GHz+9% |
| Base Clock | 2.1 GHz | 3.8 GHz+81% |
| L3 Cache | 8 MB (total) | 32 MB (total)+300% |
| L2 Cache | 2.5 MB (per core)+150% | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | 3 nm-40% | 5 nm |
| Architecture | Lunar Lake (2024) | Raphael (2023−2025) |
| PassMark | 18,219 | 18,139 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 10,000 | 10,500+5% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,683+37% | 1,962 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 10,130+434% | 1,898 |
Memory & Platform
The Core Ultra 5 238V uses the FCBGA2833 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 4124P uses AM5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to LPDDR5x-8533 memory speed. The EPYC 4124P supports up to 192 GB of RAM compared to 32 GB — 142.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 8 (Core Ultra 5 238V) vs 28 (EPYC 4124P) — the EPYC 4124P offers 20 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SoC (Core Ultra 5 238V) and B650,X670,X870 (EPYC 4124P).
| Feature | Core Ultra 5 238V | EPYC 4124P |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA2833 | AM5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | LPDDR5x-8533 | DDR5-5200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 32 GB | 192 GB+500% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 8 | 28+250% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 4124P supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 5 238V) vs AMD-V, AMD-Vi (EPYC 4124P). Both include integrated graphics — Arc Graphics 130V (Core Ultra 5 238V) and Radeon Graphics (EPYC 4124P) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core Ultra 5 238V targets Productivity, EPYC 4124P targets Entry Server. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 5 238V rivals Ryzen 5 8640U; EPYC 4124P rivals Core i5-10500T.
| Feature | Core Ultra 5 238V | EPYC 4124P |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | Arc Graphics 130V | Radeon Graphics |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | AMD-V, AMD-Vi |
| Target Use | Productivity | Entry Server |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Core Ultra 5 238V and EPYC 4124P
