Core Ultra 7 255HX vs EPYC 7413

CPU

GPU

Core Ultra 7 255HX

20 Cores20 Thrd55 WWMax: 5.2 GHz2025

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 7413

24 Cores48 Thrd180 WWMax: 3.6 GHz2021

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core Ultra 7 255HX

20 / 20

49,765

0.0%

50,641

+1.8%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

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 7 255HX

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +19.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 55W instead of 180W, a 125W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA2114 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc Xe-LPG, while EPYC 7413 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (49,765 vs 50,641).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (30 MB vs 128 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7413, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

EPYC 7413

2021

Why buy it

✅+1.8% higher PassMark.
✅+326.7% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 30 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 24.
✅433.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 255HX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Launch MSRP is still $1,825 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 255HX mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌227.3% higher power demand at 180W vs 55W.
❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 7 255HX moves to FCBGA2114 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 255HX can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core Ultra 7 255HX

2025

EPYC 7413

2021

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +19.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 55W instead of 180W, a 125W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA2114 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc Xe-LPG, while EPYC 7413 needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅+1.8% higher PassMark.
✅+326.7% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 30 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 24.
✅433.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (49,765 vs 50,641).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (30 MB vs 128 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7413, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 255HX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Launch MSRP is still $1,825 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 255HX mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌227.3% higher power demand at 180W vs 55W.
❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 7 255HX moves to FCBGA2114 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 255HX can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 7 255HX better than EPYC 7413?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 7413 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core Ultra 7 255HX 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 7413 is the better fit. You are getting 1.8% better PassMark, backed by 24 cores and 48 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 326.7% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 30 MB).

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

Core Ultra 7 255HX is still the faster CPU overall, but EPYC 7413 makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core Ultra 7 255HX is at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $1,825 MSRP, and it gives you a 19.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that EPYC 7413 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 1.8% better PassMark. EPYC 7413 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (27.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

Core Ultra 7 255HX is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2021) and a healthier platform with FCBGA2114 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 7 255HX Benchmark Check

EPYC 7413 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core Ultra 7 255HX	EPYC 7413
1080p
low	280 FPS	169 FPS
medium	272 FPS	140 FPS
high	228 FPS	120 FPS
ultra	191 FPS	94 FPS
1440p
low	225 FPS	147 FPS
medium	193 FPS	119 FPS
high	156 FPS	95 FPS
ultra	135 FPS	76 FPS
4K
low	151 FPS	69 FPS
medium	129 FPS	59 FPS
high	99 FPS	46 FPS
ultra	87 FPS	38 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 255HX Open EPYC 7413

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core Ultra 7 255HX	EPYC 7413
1080p
low	673 FPS	422 FPS
medium	574 FPS	371 FPS
high	483 FPS	301 FPS
ultra	438 FPS	237 FPS
1440p
low	584 FPS	347 FPS
medium	515 FPS	313 FPS
high	434 FPS	262 FPS
ultra	370 FPS	200 FPS
4K
low	345 FPS	213 FPS
medium	310 FPS	196 FPS
high	292 FPS	164 FPS
ultra	254 FPS	132 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 255HX Open EPYC 7413

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core Ultra 7 255HX	EPYC 7413
1080p
low	839 FPS	668 FPS
medium	685 FPS	558 FPS
high	610 FPS	519 FPS
ultra	522 FPS	452 FPS
1440p
low	727 FPS	506 FPS
medium	596 FPS	422 FPS
high	519 FPS	386 FPS
ultra	441 FPS	334 FPS
4K
low	515 FPS	374 FPS
medium	434 FPS	292 FPS
high	394 FPS	261 FPS
ultra	336 FPS	209 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 255HX Open EPYC 7413

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core Ultra 7 255HX	EPYC 7413
1080p
low	995 FPS	900 FPS
medium	901 FPS	821 FPS
high	782 FPS	707 FPS
ultra	709 FPS	623 FPS
1440p
low	814 FPS	719 FPS
medium	724 FPS	627 FPS
high	627 FPS	537 FPS
ultra	555 FPS	459 FPS
4K
low	555 FPS	516 FPS
medium	501 FPS	461 FPS
high	449 FPS	405 FPS
ultra	396 FPS	348 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 255HX Open EPYC 7413

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core Ultra 7 255HX and EPYC 7413

Core Ultra 7 255HX

The Core Ultra 7 255HX is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2025-01-01. It is based on the Arrow Lake-HX (2025) architecture. It features 20 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 5.2 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2114. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 49,765 points. Launch price was $450.

EPYC 7413

The EPYC 7413 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 15 March 2021 (4 years ago). It is based on the Milan (2021−2023) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 2.65 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm+ process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 180 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 50,641 points. Launch price was $1,825.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 7 255HX packs 20 cores / 20 threads, while the EPYC 7413 offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the EPYC 7413 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.2 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 255HX versus 3.6 GHz on the EPYC 7413 — a 36.4% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 7 255HX (base: 2.4 GHz vs 2.65 GHz). The Core Ultra 7 255HX uses the Arrow Lake-HX (2025) architecture (3 nm), while the EPYC 7413 uses Milan (2021−2023) (7 nm+). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 7 255HX scores 49,765 against the EPYC 7413's 50,641 — a 1.7% lead for the EPYC 7413. L3 cache: 30 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 7 255HX vs 128 MB (total) on the EPYC 7413.

Feature	Core Ultra 7 255HX	EPYC 7413
Cores / Threads	20 / 20	24 / 48+20%
Boost Clock	5.2 GHz+44%	3.6 GHz
Base Clock	2.4 GHz	2.65 GHz+10%
L3 Cache	30 MB (total)	128 MB (total)+327%
L2 Cache	3 MB (per core)+500%	512 kB (per core)
Process	3 nm-57%	7 nm+
Architecture	Arrow Lake-HX (2025)	Milan (2021−2023)
PassMark	49,765	50,641+2%
Geekbench 6 Single	2,923	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	16,885	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 7 255HX uses the FCBGA2114 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 7413 uses SP3 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6400 on the Core Ultra 7 255HX versus 3200 on the EPYC 7413 — the EPYC 7413 supports 199.4% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7413 supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 192 GB — 182.1% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core Ultra 7 255HX) vs 8 (EPYC 7413). PCIe lanes: 24 (Core Ultra 7 255HX) vs 128 (EPYC 7413) — the EPYC 7413 offers 104 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel HM870,Intel WM880 (Core Ultra 7 255HX) and SP3 (EPYC 7413).

Feature	Core Ultra 7 255HX	EPYC 7413
Socket	FCBGA2114	SP3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6400	3200+63900%
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB+4915100%	4096
RAM Channels	2	8+300%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	24	128+433%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core Ultra 7 255HX has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the EPYC 7413 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: true (Core Ultra 7 255HX) vs VT-x, VT-d (EPYC 7413). The Core Ultra 7 255HX includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc Xe-LPG), while the EPYC 7413 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 7 255HX rivals Ryzen 9 9850HX; EPYC 7413 rivals Xeon Gold 6338.