Core Ultra 5 236V vs EPYC 4124P

Core Ultra 5 236V vs EPYC 4124P Performance Spectrum

Core Ultra 5 236V

8 / 8

18,313

+1.0%

18,139

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

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.

Core Ultra 5 236V vs EPYC 4124P FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core Ultra 5 236V vs EPYC 4124P: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core Ultra 5 236V

2024

Why buy it

✅+1% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 17W instead of 65W, a 48W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4124P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌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.
❌No integrated graphics, while EPYC 4124P can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

EPYC 4124P

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +14.2% higher average FPS across 50 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 0.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (28 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon Graphics, while Core Ultra 5 236V needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (18,139 vs 18,313).
❌282.4% higher power demand at 65W vs 17W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 5 236V better than EPYC 4124P?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. EPYC 4124P makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core Ultra 5 236V is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core Ultra 5 236V is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 8 threads.

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

Core Ultra 5 236V still makes the most sense overall. Core Ultra 5 236V comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 1% better PassMark.

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

EPYC 4124P makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core Ultra 5 236V vs EPYC 4124P Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core Ultra 5 236V

The Core Ultra 5 236V 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: 18,313 points. Launch price was $299.

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 236V packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the EPYC 4124P offers 4 cores / 8 threads — the Core Ultra 5 236V has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.7 GHz on the Core Ultra 5 236V 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 236V uses the Lunar Lake (2024) architecture (3 nm), while the EPYC 4124P uses Raphael (2023−2025) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 5 236V scores 18,313 against the EPYC 4124P's 18,139 — a 1% lead for the Core Ultra 5 236V. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 5 236V vs 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 4124P.

Feature	Core Ultra 5 236V	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	18,313	18,139
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	10,500
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,962
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	1,898

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 5 236V uses the FCBGA2833 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 4124P uses AM5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core Ultra 5 236V	EPYC 4124P
Socket	FCBGA2833	AM5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR5-5200
Max RAM Capacity	—	192 GB
RAM Channels	—	2
ECC Support	—	Yes
PCIe Lanes	—	28

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Core Ultra 5 236V) / AMD-V, AMD-Vi (EPYC 4124P). The EPYC 4124P includes integrated graphics (Radeon Graphics), while the Core Ultra 5 236V requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: EPYC 4124P targets Entry Server. Direct competitor: EPYC 4124P rivals Core i5-10500T.