AMD EPYC 9454 vs Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4

Processor comparisons   15-03-2023
   Let's say you have difficulties with the choice of a processor, you will solve them by reading the detailed tests AMD EPYC 9454 vs Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 and understand which is better for games or simple use for streaming, machine learning, programming, video editing, rendering. Here you can find all information from real streaming and video editing tests or various benchmarks. A step-by-step analysis of all the specifications, so that it can be easier to understand, is presented in the form of the table.
   From the comparison video, you can get the results of joint testing in synthetic type tests such as DaVinci Resolve Studio, Blender, Blender, 7zip, AIDA64, PCMark 10, RealBench, PassMark, GeekBench 6, 5.2, Handbrake, Prime95, World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, WPrime, MATLAB, Furmark, VeraCrypt, Cinebench 23 (20, 15), Gears 5, UserBenchmark, 3DMark, SuperPi, Dolphin Emulator.
   Gaming performance of processors in:

Halo Infinite
Watch Dogs Legion
Last Man Standing
Assassin's Creed Valhalla
Overwatch
Apex Legends
DOOM: Eternal
Rainbow Six Siege
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
Valheim
Death Stranding
Borderlands 3
Valorant
Fallout 76
Fortnite
Red Dead Redemption 2
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and Warzone
Cyberpunk 2077
Grand Theft Auto V

After looking at the data these benchmarks and videos, you can already make an briefed decision about which processor is better to buy for gaming Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 or AMD EPYC 9454.

Summary benchmark results

As a percentage of the maximum value based on a sample from the entire base of all processors
Processor Benchmark

EPYC 9454

74%

Xeon E5-2697R v4

55%

This value shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, EPYC 9454 is 25% better than Xeon E5-2697R v4. The data source is several popular tests. More detailed information of the benchmarks is below.

Gaming performance
Summary result of all game benchmarks.

EPYC 9454

81%

Xeon E5-2697R v4

61%

The maximum result in this parameter is 100 percent, which is the performance of the most powerful processor at the moment. And of course, this is a server processor, on which no one will run games. Because this processor costs several tens of thousands of dollars. And if it seems to you that the selected CPU has a small game result, look at the FPS that it produces in real games in the final table below.
List of other games in which CPU comparisons were performed: Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Monster Hunter World, DOTA 2A, Horizon Zero Dawn, Control, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Battlefield V, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), Microsoft Flight Simulator, Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, NBA 2K20, Hitman 3, Half-Life: Alyx, Ghostrunner, League of Legends (LOL), Metro Exodus, Forza Horizon 4, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO).

Gaming benchmark

Fortnite	143.4	108.6
Valorant	163.0	123.4
Cyberpunk 2077	91.3	69.1
Apex Legends	153.2	116.0
Call of Duty Warzone	122.2	92.6
Overwatch	132.0	100.0
Red Dead Redemption 2	112.5	85.2
DOOM Eternal	81.5	61.7
Warzone	127.1	96.3
Assassin's Creed	136.9	103.7
Valheim	135.3	102.5

The numbers in this table indicate the maximum FPS that was received on the device with the corresponding processor. Depending on the configuration of the computer (RAM size and Video Card) and graphics quality settings (Ultra, Medium, Normal), the results may differ quite significantly. We recommend that you better study the results of the Cinebench, GeekBench and Passmark becnmarks.
The computers participating in the comparisons not only were the equipped with different amounts of RAM and different video cards. But users also tested them at different screen resolutions: 2K, FullHD or 4K. So the game benchmark data is approximate. But all video cards met the average system requirements of games. You will get more accurate information about how powerful the processor will be in games, if you get acquainted with the benchmarks that are made with the same video card that is installed in your computer.

Power consumption

EPYC 9454

18%

Xeon E5-2697R v4

20%

To make a final decision on which processor is better, you should also consider the generation of its core. The newer the processor generation, the better its performance in games and benchmarks, as well as its energy efficiency. In this case the Xeon E5-2697R v4 is more energy efficient than the EPYC 9454 since it has less power consumption: 290W vs. 145W. Power consumption is particularly important for laptops. Also, when choosing a processor cooling system, it will be useful to know its TDP. You need to buy a cooler that has the TDP data specified in the specification was greater than the TDP of the compared processor.

Software benchmarks

If you want to use the processor not only for gaming, but also for machine learning, video editing or video rendering, streaming, programming, then first of all you need to pay attention to the performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, to achieve maximum efficiency, the processor uses all threads and cores that it has. You will find out this data from the benchmark tables below. Before using the data from these tests, be sure to make sure that the software that you are going to use on your computer can work in multi-threaded mode. Because there are still many programs that can use only one core to work, and all the benefit of multi-core mode are unused.
Cinebench 23, 20 an 15
The results of this benchmark show Single-threaded and Multi-threaded CPU performance

	AMD EPYC 9454	Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4
Cinbench 15 Single-core	215	108
Cinbench 15 Multi-core	9941	3177
Cinbench 20 Single-core	428	240
Cinbench 20 Multi-core	21096	7475
Cinbench 23 Single-core	1093	641
Cinbench 23 Multi-core	54903	18061

Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance

	AMD EPYC 9454	Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4
Single-Core	2487	1916
Multi-Core	80546	18383

GeekBench 6, 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance

	AMD EPYC 9454	Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4
Single-Core	1569	910
Multi-Core	54343	20218

Comparison of specifications

In the specification comparison table, the most useful will be the the possibility of overclocking it and release date of the processor. The newer the processor, the longer it will last in your computer. And the easier it will be to upgrade the system in the future. The same can be said about overclocking. If the processor can be overclocked, thereby increasing its performance, then it will continue to maintain maximum FPS even in new games. The economy are obvious! Accordingly, there is no longer a need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer.

	AMD EPYC 9454	Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4
Announcement date	November 10, 2022	January 01, 2021
Type	Server	Server
Socket	SP5	FCLGA2011-3
Core name	Genoa	Broadwell
Architecture	Zen 4	x86
Generation	4	4
Turbo Frequency	3.8 MHz	3.6 MHz
Frequency	2.75 MHz	2.3 MHz
Cores	48	18
Threads	96	36
Bus rate		9.6 GT/s
Bit	64	64
Lithography	5 nm	14 nm
Transistors count	64000 millions	4130 millions
Power consumption (TDP)	290 W	145 W
Memory type	DDR5	DDR4 1600/1866/2133/2400
Max. Memory	4096 Gb	15 Gb
Memory Frequency	4800
Memory bandwidth	460.8 GB/s	76.8 GB/s
L1 cache
L2 cache
L3 cache	256MB	45 MB
Overclocking	No	Yes
Supports ECC	Yes	Yes
Part number	100-000000478 100-100000478WOF

In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here EPYC 9454 is 16% better than Xeon E5-2697R v4 in terms of CPU frequency. Another difference is that EPYC 9454 has 30 more core than Xeon E5-2697R v4. Also keep in mind that high CPU frequency affects battery life through power consumption (relevant for laptops).

Result:
The number of parameters for which AMD EPYC 9454 is better: 30
The number of parameters for which Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 is better: 5
Although it should be understood that the summary data in the table above do not mean that taking them into account you should completely trust a simple quantitative comparison. Better to watch the testing video and read the reviews of real owners of AMD EPYC 9454 and Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 before deciding which processor to buy for gaming and which not.

AMD EPYC 9454 - all data

• Cinebench r15 score
• Cinebench r20 score
• Cinebench r23 score
• GeekBench 6, 5.2 score

• AMD EPYC 9454 specs and review.

• Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 specs and review.

AMD EPYC 9454 Processor Comparisons
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs EPYC 7702
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs Xeon E-2234
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8260M
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs EPYC 9334
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs EPYC 9554P
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs EPYC 9634
• Vs EPYC 9654
• Vs EPYC 9174F
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs Xeon D-1602
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs EPYC 9274F
• Vs EPYC 9554
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs EPYC 9124
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs EPYC 9354P
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs EPYC 9354
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs EPYC 9224
• Vs EPYC 9534
• Vs EPYC 9254
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs EPYC 9374F
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• Vs EPYC 9454P
• Vs EPYC 9474F
• Vs EPYC 7232P
• Vs EPYC 7402
• Vs EPYC 7252
• Vs EPYC 7262
• Vs EPYC 7352
• Vs EPYC 7532
• Vs EPYC 7542
• Vs EPYC 7552
• Vs EPYC 7642
• Vs EPYC 7662
• Vs EPYC 7702P
• Vs EPYC 7H12
• Vs EPYC 7373X
• Vs Xeon Gold 5415+
• Vs Xeon Gold 6434
• Vs EPYC 7473X
• Vs Xeon Gold 6434H
• Vs EPYC 7573X
• Vs Xeon Bronze 3408U
• Vs Xeon Silver 4410T
• Vs Xeon Silver 4410Y
• Vs EPYC 7773X
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8444H
• Vs Xeon Gold 5416S
• Vs Xeon Gold 6416H
• Vs Xeon Silver 4416+

Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 Processor Comparisons
• Vs Core i7-9700E
• Vs Ryzen 7 5800
• Vs Core i9-9900K
• Vs Ryzen 5 3600XT
• Vs Ryzen 7 4800H
• Vs Core i7-10700K
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 4750GE
• Vs Core i5-11600K
• Vs Ryzen 9 4900U
• Vs Ryzen 5 5600G
• Vs Apple M1
• Vs Ryzen 5 5600X
• Vs Ryzen 7 5800U
• Vs Ryzen 7 3700X
• Vs Ryzen 9 5900HS
• Vs Core i9-10850K
• Vs Ryzen 7 3800X
• Vs Ryzen 9 5900HX
• Vs Core i9-10900K
• Vs Core i9-9920X
• Vs Ryzen 7 5800H
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 2920X
• Vs Ryzen 9 5980HS
• Vs Core i9-10920X
• Vs Ryzen 9 5980HX
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
• Vs Core i9-7940X
• Vs Core i9-7960X
• Vs Core i7-11700K
• Vs Ryzen 7 Pro 5850U
• Vs Ryzen 5 3600X
• Vs Core i7-10700
• Vs Ryzen 5 3600
• Vs Ryzen 7 2700X
• Vs Core i7-10700F
• Vs Core i7-10875H
• Vs Ryzen 7 2700
• Vs Ryzen 5 4600H
• Vs Core i5-10600K
• Vs Ryzen 7 1700
• Vs Core i7-9700K
• Vs Ryzen 5 2600X
• Vs Core i7-8700K
• Vs Ryzen 7 4700U
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 2600
• Vs Core i7-9700
• Vs Ryzen 5 3500X
• Vs Ryzen 5 2600
• Vs Core i7-8700
• Vs Ryzen 3 3300X
• Vs Core i7-10750H
• Vs Core i5-10400F
• Vs Core i5-10400
• Vs Ryzen 5 1600
• Vs Ryzen 3 4300GE
• Vs Ryzen 3 3100
• Vs Core i5-1145G7
• Vs Core i7-1160G7
• Vs Ryzen 5 4500U
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs Core i5-10600
• Vs Core i5-10500
• Vs Core i7-10700T
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 4400GE
• Vs Core i7-10870H
• Vs Ryzen 5 4600HS
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs Ryzen 5 4600U
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs Core i7-11800H
• Vs Core i9-11900T
• Vs Core i7-11700
• Vs Core i7-11700F
• Vs Core i7-11700T
• Vs Ryzen 7 3800XT
• Vs Core i5-11600KF
• Vs Core i5-11600
• Vs Core i5-11600T
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 3700
• Vs Core i5-11500
• Vs Core i5-11500T
• Vs Core i5-11400
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 1920X
• Vs Core i5-11400F
• Vs Core i5-11400T
• Vs Ryzen 5 5600HS
• Vs Ryzen 5 5500U
• Vs Ryzen 7 5700U
• Vs Ryzen 5 5600H
• Vs Ryzen 5 5600U
• Vs Core i9-10910
• Vs Core i9-10900X
• Vs Core i7-10700KF
• Vs Core i9-9900X
• Vs Core i9-7900X
• Vs Core i9-10900F
• Vs Core i9-10900
• Vs Core i9-9820X
• Vs Core i9-9900KS
• Vs Core i7-7900X
• Vs Core i9-10900T
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 4700G
• Vs Core i9-9900KF
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 3600
• Vs Ryzen 7 4700G
• Vs Core i7-9800X
• Vs Ryzen 9 4900H
• Vs Ryzen 9 4900HS
• Vs Ryzen 7 4800HS
• Vs Ryzen 7 4700GE
• Vs Ryzen 7 Extreme Edition
• Vs Core i7-7820X
• Vs Ryzen 7 4800U
• Vs Core i7-6950X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
• Vs Core i9-9900
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 2700X
• Vs Core i9-10980HK
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 4650G
• Vs Core i9-10885H
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 4400G
• Vs Ryzen 7 1800X
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE
• Vs Ryzen 5 4600GE
• Vs Core i9-10900TE
• Vs Core i9-10900E
• Vs Core i5-1155G7
• Vs Core i5-11500B
• Vs Core i5-11400H
• Vs Core i5-11500H
• Vs Core i7-12700H
• Vs Core i5-1230U
• Vs Core i5-1240U
• Vs Core i7-1250U
• Vs Core i5-1235U
• Vs Core i5-1245U
• Vs Core i7-1255U
• Vs Core i7-1260U
• Vs Core i7-1265U
• Vs Core i3-1220P
• Vs Core i5-1240P
• Vs Core i5-1250P
• Vs Core i3-12100
• Vs Core i3-12100E
• Vs Core i3-12100F
• Vs Core i3-12100T
• Vs Core i3-12100TE
• Vs Core i3-12300T
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 5875U
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 5675U
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 5650GE
• Vs Core i7-1265UE
• Vs Core i7-1265UL
• Vs Core i7-1255UL
• Vs Core i5-1235UL
• Vs Core i5-1245UL
• Vs Core i5-1245UE
• Vs Core i3-1220PE
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• Vs EPYC 9654
• Vs EPYC 9634
• Vs EPYC 9554
• Vs EPYC 9554P
• Vs EPYC 9534
• Vs EPYC 9124
• Vs EPYC 9224
• Vs EPYC 9174F
• Vs EPYC 9254
• Vs EPYC 9274F
• Vs EPYC 9334
• Vs EPYC 9354
• Vs EPYC 9354P
• Vs EPYC 9374F
• Vs EPYC 9454P
• Vs EPYC 9474F
• Vs EPYC 7232P
• Vs EPYC 7402
• Vs EPYC 7252
• Vs EPYC 7262
• Vs EPYC 7352
• Vs EPYC 7532
• Vs EPYC 7542
• Vs EPYC 7552
• Vs EPYC 7642
• Vs EPYC 7662
• Vs EPYC 7702P
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs EPYC 7H12
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs EPYC 7373X
• Vs Xeon Gold 5415+
• Vs Xeon Gold 6434
• Vs EPYC 7473X
• Vs Xeon Gold 6434H
• Vs EPYC 7573X
• Vs Xeon Bronze 3408U
• Vs Xeon Silver 4410T
• Vs Xeon Silver 4410Y
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs EPYC 7773X
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8444H
• Vs Xeon Gold 5416S
• Vs Xeon Gold 6416H
• Vs Xeon Silver 4416+