Core Ultra 7 155H
EPYC 7351P
Core Ultra 7 155H vs EPYC 7351P Performance Spectrum
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 7 155H vs EPYC 7351P 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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Core Ultra 7 155H vs EPYC 7351P: 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 7 155H
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +18.2% higher average FPS across 50 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
2017Why 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 50 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?
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?
Core Ultra 7 155H vs EPYC 7351P Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
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) | 512K (per core)+25500% |
| 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 | — |
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 7 155H and EPYC 7351P
