Core Ultra 7 155H vs EPYC 7351P

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 7 155H

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +41.8% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA2049 with DDR5 support instead of TR4 and DDR4.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (28 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc Graphics (8 Xe-cores), while EPYC 7351P needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Laptop Integrated), unlike EPYC 7351P.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (24,705 vs 24,871).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7351P, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads.

EPYC 7351P

2017

Why buy it

✅+0.7% higher PassMark.
✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 24 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 155H across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Older platform position on TR4 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 7 155H moves to FCBGA2049 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 155H can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core Ultra 7 155H.

Core Ultra 7 155H

2023

EPYC 7351P

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +41.8% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA2049 with DDR5 support instead of TR4 and DDR4.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (28 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc Graphics (8 Xe-cores), while EPYC 7351P needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Laptop Integrated), unlike EPYC 7351P.

Why buy it

✅+0.7% higher PassMark.
✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 24 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (24,705 vs 24,871).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7351P, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 155H across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Older platform position on TR4 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 7 155H moves to FCBGA2049 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 155H can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core Ultra 7 155H.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 7351P better than Core Ultra 7 155H?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 7351P makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core Ultra 7 155H 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 7351P is the better fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 166.7% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 24 MB).

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

EPYC 7351P still looks like the safer overall buy. EPYC 7351P is at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you 0.7% better PassMark.

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

Core Ultra 7 155H is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2017) and a healthier platform with FCBGA2049 and DDR5 instead of TR4. 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 7 155H Benchmark Check

EPYC 7351P Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core Ultra 7 155H	EPYC 7351P
1080p
low	308 FPS	183 FPS
medium	278 FPS	160 FPS
high	232 FPS	128 FPS
ultra	198 FPS	102 FPS
1440p
low	251 FPS	151 FPS
medium	201 FPS	126 FPS
high	163 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	143 FPS	77 FPS
4K
low	173 FPS	70 FPS
medium	139 FPS	62 FPS
high	107 FPS	48 FPS
ultra	93 FPS	39 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 155H Open EPYC 7351P

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core Ultra 7 155H	EPYC 7351P
1080p
low	618 FPS	353 FPS
medium	532 FPS	321 FPS
high	434 FPS	271 FPS
ultra	389 FPS	219 FPS
1440p
low	550 FPS	305 FPS
medium	457 FPS	279 FPS
high	385 FPS	239 FPS
ultra	328 FPS	187 FPS
4K
low	340 FPS	190 FPS
medium	286 FPS	176 FPS
high	261 FPS	151 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	122 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 155H Open EPYC 7351P

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core Ultra 7 155H	EPYC 7351P
1080p
low	618 FPS	614 FPS
medium	618 FPS	513 FPS
high	618 FPS	462 FPS
ultra	618 FPS	396 FPS
1440p
low	618 FPS	513 FPS
medium	618 FPS	428 FPS
high	618 FPS	376 FPS
ultra	543 FPS	323 FPS
4K
low	618 FPS	381 FPS
medium	531 FPS	305 FPS
high	475 FPS	269 FPS
ultra	402 FPS	219 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 155H Open EPYC 7351P

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core Ultra 7 155H	EPYC 7351P
1080p
low	618 FPS	622 FPS
medium	618 FPS	622 FPS
high	618 FPS	622 FPS
ultra	618 FPS	569 FPS
1440p
low	618 FPS	622 FPS
medium	618 FPS	588 FPS
high	618 FPS	504 FPS
ultra	579 FPS	425 FPS
4K
low	606 FPS	476 FPS
medium	538 FPS	430 FPS
high	486 FPS	378 FPS
ultra	423 FPS	323 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 155H Open EPYC 7351P

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core Ultra 7 155H and EPYC 7351P

Core Ultra 7 155H

The Core Ultra 7 155H is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 December 2023 (1 year ago). It is based on the Meteor Lake-H (2023) architecture. It features 16 cores and 22 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 24 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on 7 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2049. Thermal design power (TDP): + 24 MB. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 24,705 points. Launch price was $503.

EPYC 7351P

The EPYC 7351P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 29 June 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Naples (2017−2018) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: TR4. Thermal design power (TDP): 170 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 24,871 points. Launch price was $750.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 7 155H packs 16 cores / 22 threads, matching the EPYC 7351P's 16 cores. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 155H versus 2.9 GHz on the EPYC 7351P — a 49.4% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 7 155H (base: 3.8 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Core Ultra 7 155H uses the Meteor Lake-H (2023) architecture (7 nm), while the EPYC 7351P uses Naples (2017−2018) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 7 155H scores 24,705 against the EPYC 7351P's 24,871 — a 0.7% lead for the EPYC 7351P. L3 cache: 24 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 7 155H vs 64 MB (total) on the EPYC 7351P.

Feature	Core Ultra 7 155H	EPYC 7351P
Cores / Threads	16 / 22	16 / 32
Boost Clock	4.8 GHz+66%	2.9 GHz
Base Clock	3.8 GHz+58%	2.4 GHz
L3 Cache	24 MB (total)	64 MB (total)+167%
L2 Cache	2 MB (per core)+300%	512K (per core)
Process	7 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Meteor Lake-H (2023)	Naples (2017−2018)
PassMark	24,705	24,871
Cinebench R23 Multi	17,650	—
Geekbench 6 Single	2,384	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	12,433	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 7 155H uses the FCBGA2049 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 7351P uses TR4 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core Ultra 7 155H	EPYC 7351P
Socket	FCBGA2049	TR4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	LPDDR5x-7467, DDR5-5600	—
Max RAM Capacity	96 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	28	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core Ultra 7 155H) / not specified (EPYC 7351P). The Core Ultra 7 155H includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc Graphics (8 Xe-cores)), while the EPYC 7351P requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core Ultra 7 155H targets Thin-and-light Performance / AI. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 7 155H rivals Ryzen 7 8840HS.

Feature	Core Ultra 7 155H	EPYC 7351P
Integrated GPU	Yes	—
IGPU Model	Intel Arc Graphics (8 Xe-cores)	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d, EPT	—
Target Use	Thin-and-light Performance / AI	—