Core Ultra 7 265HX
EPYC 4465P
Core Ultra 7 265HX vs EPYC 4465P 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 265HX vs EPYC 4465P 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 265HX vs EPYC 4465P: 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 265HX
2025Why buy it
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4465P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (48,975 vs 50,216).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (30 MB vs 64 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 4465P, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads and 28 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 108.8 vs 125.9 PassMark/$ ($450 MSRP vs $399 MSRP).
EPYC 4465P
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +3.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+113.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 30 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads, plus 28 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅Costs $51 less on MSRP ($399 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 15.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 125.9 vs 108.8 PassMark/$ ($399 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 4465P better than Core Ultra 7 265HX?
Which one is better for gaming?
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 265HX vs EPYC 4465P Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
Core Ultra 7 265HX
The Core Ultra 7 265HX 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 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 5.3 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: 48,975 points. Launch price was $500.
EPYC 4465P
The EPYC 4465P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 13 May 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Grado (2025) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: AM5. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 50,216 points. Launch price was $399.
Processing Power
The Core Ultra 7 265HX packs 20 cores / 20 threads, while the EPYC 4465P offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the Core Ultra 7 265HX has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.3 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 265HX versus 5.4 GHz on the EPYC 4465P — a 1.9% clock advantage for the EPYC 4465P (base: 2.6 GHz vs 3.4 GHz). The Core Ultra 7 265HX uses the Arrow Lake-HX (2025) architecture (3 nm), while the EPYC 4465P uses Grado (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 7 265HX scores 48,975 against the EPYC 4465P's 50,216 — a 2.5% lead for the EPYC 4465P. L3 cache: 30 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 7 265HX vs 64 MB (total) on the EPYC 4465P.
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 265HX | EPYC 4465P |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 20 / 20+67% | 12 / 24 |
| Boost Clock | 5.3 GHz | 5.4 GHz+2% |
| Base Clock | 2.6 GHz | 3.4 GHz+31% |
| L3 Cache | 30 MB (total) | 64 MB (total)+113% |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB (per core)+200% | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | 3 nm-25% | 4 nm |
| Architecture | Arrow Lake-HX (2025) | Grado (2025) |
| PassMark | 48,975 | 50,216+3% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,990 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 17,417 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Core Ultra 7 265HX uses the FCBGA2114 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 4465P uses AM5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6400 on the Core Ultra 7 265HX versus 5200 on the EPYC 4465P — the Core Ultra 7 265HX supports 23.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core Ultra 7 265HX supports up to 192 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 50% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 20 (Core Ultra 7 265HX) vs 28 (EPYC 4465P) — the EPYC 4465P offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: WM880,HM870 (Core Ultra 7 265HX) and AM5 (EPYC 4465P).
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 265HX | EPYC 4465P |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA2114 | AM5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-6400+23% | 5200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB+50% | 128 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 28+40% |
Advanced Features
Both processors feature an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 7 265HX) vs VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V (EPYC 4465P). Both include integrated graphics — Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU (Core Ultra 7 265HX) and AMD Radeon Graphics (EPYC 4465P) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: EPYC 4465P rivals Core i7-14700K.
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 265HX | EPYC 4465P |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU | AMD Radeon Graphics |
| Unlocked | Yes | Yes |
| AVX-512 | Yes | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V |
Value Analysis
At launch, the Core Ultra 7 265HX was priced at $450, while the EPYC 4465P came in at $399. On launch pricing ($450 vs $399), EPYC 4465P was $51 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core Ultra 7 265HX delivers 108.8 pts/$ vs 125.9 pts/$ for the EPYC 4465P — making the EPYC 4465P the 14.5% better value option.
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 265HX | EPYC 4465P |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $450 | $399-11% |
| Performance per Dollar | 108.8 | 125.9+16% |
| Release Date | 2025 | 2025 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
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 265HX and EPYC 4465P
