Core Ultra 7 255HX vs EPYC 4484PX

Core Ultra 7 255HX vs EPYC 4484PX Performance Spectrum

Core Ultra 7 255HX

20 / 20

49,765

0.0%

50,547

+1.6%

Ryzen 7 5800X3D

Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 375

Ryzen 9 5900X

Ryzen 9 7845HX

Ryzen 9 9950X

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.

Core Ultra 7 255HX vs EPYC 4484PX 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 7 255HX vs EPYC 4484PX: 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 255HX

2025

Why buy it

✅Draws 55W instead of 120W, a 65W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4484PX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (16,885 vs 17,500).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 4484PX, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads and 28 PCIe lanes.

EPYC 4484PX

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +18.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads, plus 28 PCIe lanes vs 24.
✅16.7% more PCIe lanes (28 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $599 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 255HX mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌118.2% higher power demand at 120W vs 55W.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 4484PX better than Core Ultra 7 255HX?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. EPYC 4484PX makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core Ultra 7 255HX is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, EPYC 4484PX is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 18.6% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests. It also has a clear cache advantage at 128 MB versus 30 MB.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 4484PX is the stronger fit. You are getting 3.6% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 12 cores and 24 threads. It also has 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?

EPYC 4484PX is the better buy right now. EPYC 4484PX comes in at an unclear MSRP at $599 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 18.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (84.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

EPYC 4484PX makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 3D V-Cache and a much larger 128 MB L3 cache instead of 30 MB, more multi-core headroom with 12 cores / 24 threads instead of 20/20, and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. That extra cache should keep paying off in CPU-limited games and high-refresh builds.

Core Ultra 7 255HX vs EPYC 4484PX Technical Specifications

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

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 4484PX

The EPYC 4484PX 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 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 4.4 GHz, with boost up to 5.6 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: AM5. Thermal design power (TDP): 120 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 50,547 points. Launch price was $599.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 7 255HX packs 20 cores / 20 threads, while the EPYC 4484PX offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the Core Ultra 7 255HX has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.2 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 255HX versus 5.6 GHz on the EPYC 4484PX — a 7.4% clock advantage for the EPYC 4484PX (base: 2.4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The Core Ultra 7 255HX uses the Arrow Lake-HX (2025) architecture (3 nm), while the EPYC 4484PX uses Raphael (2023−2025) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 7 255HX scores 49,765 against the EPYC 4484PX's 50,547 — a 1.6% lead for the EPYC 4484PX. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,923 vs 2,950, a 0.9% lead for the EPYC 4484PX that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 16,885 vs 17,500 (3.6% advantage for the EPYC 4484PX). L3 cache: 30 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 7 255HX vs 128 MB (total) on the EPYC 4484PX.

Feature	Core Ultra 7 255HX	EPYC 4484PX
Cores / Threads	20 / 20+67%	12 / 24
Boost Clock	5.2 GHz	5.6 GHz+8%
Base Clock	2.4 GHz	4.4 GHz+83%
L3 Cache	30 MB (total)	128 MB (total)+327%
L2 Cache	3 MB (per core)+200%	1 MB (per core)
Process	3 nm-40%	5 nm
Architecture	Arrow Lake-HX (2025)	Raphael (2023−2025)
PassMark	49,765	50,547+2%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	24,500
Geekbench 6 Single	2,923	2,950
Geekbench 6 Multi	16,885	17,500+4%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 7 255HX uses the FCBGA2114 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 4484PX uses AM5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6400 on the Core Ultra 7 255HX versus DDR5-5200 on the EPYC 4484PX — the Core Ultra 7 255HX supports 23.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 192 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 24 (Core Ultra 7 255HX) vs 28 (EPYC 4484PX) — the EPYC 4484PX offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel HM870,Intel WM880 (Core Ultra 7 255HX) and B650,X670,X870 (EPYC 4484PX).

Feature	Core Ultra 7 255HX	EPYC 4484PX
Socket	FCBGA2114	AM5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6400+23%	DDR5-5200
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB	192 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	24	28+17%

🔧

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 4484PX supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: true (Core Ultra 7 255HX) vs AMD-V, AMD-Vi (EPYC 4484PX). Both include integrated graphics — Intel Arc Xe-LPG (Core Ultra 7 255HX) and Radeon Graphics (EPYC 4484PX) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: EPYC 4484PX targets Workstation / Server. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 7 255HX rivals Ryzen 9 9850HX; EPYC 4484PX rivals Ryzen 9 7900X3D.

Feature	Core Ultra 7 255HX	EPYC 4484PX
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	Intel Arc Xe-LPG	Radeon Graphics
Unlocked	Yes	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	true	AMD-V, AMD-Vi
Target Use	—	Workstation / Server