Core Ultra 7 265H vs EPYC 4364P

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 265H

2025

Why buy it

✅+1.4% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 26W instead of 105W, a 79W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 32 MB).

EPYC 4364P

2024

Why buy it

✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 24 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (34,215 vs 34,702).
❌Launch MSRP is still $399 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 265H mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌303.8% higher power demand at 105W vs 26W.

Core Ultra 7 265H

2025

EPYC 4364P

2024

Why buy it

✅+1.4% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 26W instead of 105W, a 79W reduction.

Why buy it

✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 24 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 32 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (34,215 vs 34,702).
❌Launch MSRP is still $399 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 265H mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌303.8% higher power demand at 105W vs 26W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 7 265H better than EPYC 4364P?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 4364P makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core Ultra 7 265H 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, Core Ultra 7 265H is the better fit. You are getting 1.4% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 16 threads.

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

Core Ultra 7 265H is still the faster CPU overall, but EPYC 4364P makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core Ultra 7 265H is at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $399 MSRP, and it gives you 1.4% better PassMark. The trade-off is that EPYC 4364P is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 0.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. EPYC 4364P is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (85.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 265H is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2024) and more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 16 threads instead of 8/16. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

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 265H Benchmark Check

EPYC 4364P Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core Ultra 7 265H	EPYC 4364P
1080p
low	310 FPS	249 FPS
medium	280 FPS	232 FPS
high	234 FPS	201 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	173 FPS
1440p
low	252 FPS	218 FPS
medium	202 FPS	183 FPS
high	164 FPS	152 FPS
ultra	143 FPS	134 FPS
4K
low	174 FPS	152 FPS
medium	140 FPS	127 FPS
high	108 FPS	99 FPS
ultra	94 FPS	86 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 265H Open EPYC 4364P

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core Ultra 7 265H	EPYC 4364P
1080p
low	862 FPS	710 FPS
medium	658 FPS	565 FPS
high	534 FPS	465 FPS
ultra	469 FPS	413 FPS
1440p
low	734 FPS	597 FPS
medium	588 FPS	499 FPS
high	481 FPS	417 FPS
ultra	398 FPS	351 FPS
4K
low	428 FPS	348 FPS
medium	351 FPS	297 FPS
high	321 FPS	278 FPS
ultra	275 FPS	241 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 265H Open EPYC 4364P

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core Ultra 7 265H	EPYC 4364P
1080p
low	868 FPS	855 FPS
medium	868 FPS	855 FPS
high	780 FPS	855 FPS
ultra	662 FPS	855 FPS
1440p
low	868 FPS	855 FPS
medium	735 FPS	855 FPS
high	635 FPS	790 FPS
ultra	544 FPS	656 FPS
4K
low	642 FPS	582 FPS
medium	534 FPS	500 FPS
high	483 FPS	450 FPS
ultra	409 FPS	380 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 265H Open EPYC 4364P

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core Ultra 7 265H	EPYC 4364P
1080p
low	868 FPS	855 FPS
medium	868 FPS	855 FPS
high	868 FPS	855 FPS
ultra	783 FPS	852 FPS
1440p
low	868 FPS	855 FPS
medium	804 FPS	855 FPS
high	704 FPS	766 FPS
ultra	610 FPS	647 FPS
4K
low	613 FPS	682 FPS
medium	541 FPS	600 FPS
high	489 FPS	531 FPS
ultra	428 FPS	437 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 265H Open EPYC 4364P

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core Ultra 7 265H and EPYC 4364P

Core Ultra 7 265H

The Core Ultra 7 265H 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 16 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 4.5 GHz, with boost up to 5.3 GHz. L3 cache: 24 MB. Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2049. Thermal design power (TDP): 26 MB + 24 MB. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 34,702 points. Launch price was $471.

EPYC 4364P

The EPYC 4364P 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 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 4.5 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: AM5. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 34,215 points. Launch price was $399.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 7 265H packs 16 cores / 16 threads, while the EPYC 4364P offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Core Ultra 7 265H has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.3 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 265H versus 5.4 GHz on the EPYC 4364P — a 1.9% clock advantage for the EPYC 4364P (base: 4.5 GHz vs 4.5 GHz). The Core Ultra 7 265H uses the Arrow Lake-H (2025) architecture (5 nm), while the EPYC 4364P uses Raphael (2023−2025) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 7 265H scores 34,702 against the EPYC 4364P's 34,215 — a 1.4% lead for the Core Ultra 7 265H. L3 cache: 24 MB on the Core Ultra 7 265H vs 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 4364P.

Feature	Core Ultra 7 265H	EPYC 4364P
Cores / Threads	16 / 16+100%	8 / 16
Boost Clock	5.3 GHz	5.4 GHz+2%
Base Clock	4.5 GHz	4.5 GHz
L3 Cache	24 MB	32 MB (total)+33%
L2 Cache	—	1 MB (per core)
Process	5 nm	5 nm
Architecture	Arrow Lake-H (2025)	Raphael (2023−2025)
PassMark	34,702+1%	34,215
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	21,000
Geekbench 6 Single	—	3,085
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	15,594

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 7 265H uses the FCBGA2049 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 4364P uses AM5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 8400 on the Core Ultra 7 265H versus DDR5-5200 on the EPYC 4364P — the Core Ultra 7 265H supports 199.8% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 4364P supports up to 192 GB of RAM compared to 128 — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 28 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: BGA 2049 (Core Ultra 7 265H) and B650,X670,X870 (EPYC 4364P).

Feature	Core Ultra 7 265H	EPYC 4364P
Socket	FCBGA2049	AM5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	8400+167900%	DDR5-5200
Max RAM Capacity	128	192 GB+157286300%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	28	28

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 7 265H) vs AMD-V, AMD-Vi (EPYC 4364P). Both include integrated graphics — Intel Arc 140T GPU (Core Ultra 7 265H) and Radeon Graphics (EPYC 4364P) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: EPYC 4364P targets Entry Server. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 7 265H rivals Ryzen AI 9 HX 370; EPYC 4364P rivals Xeon E-2488.

Feature	Core Ultra 7 265H	EPYC 4364P
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	Intel Arc 140T GPU	Radeon Graphics
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V, AMD-Vi
Target Use	—	Entry Server