 |
AMD EPYC 7642 vs AMD EPYC 9174F |
|
Processor comparisons 19-03-2023
For example you are thinking about choosing a processor, you will be able to make a choice by looking at the AMD EPYC 7642 vs AMD EPYC 9174F tests and decide which is better for games or normal use for streaming, machine learning, rendering, programming, video editing. Here you can find all information from real video editing and streaming tests or various benchmarks. A step-by-step analysis of all the technical characteristics, so that it can be easier to read, is presented in the form of the table.
From the comparison video, you can get the results of parallel examination in special test applications such as Cinebench 23 (20, 15), SuperPi, Furmark, WPrime, Gears 5, AIDA64, 7zip, Prime95, World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, Blender, VeraCrypt, Blender, Dolphin Emulator, UserBenchmark, PassMark, MATLAB, PCMark 10, Handbrake, GeekBench 6, 5.2, 3DMark, RealBench, DaVinci Resolve Studio.
Gaming performance of processors in: - Fortnite
- Valorant
- DOOM: Eternal
- Halo Infinite
- World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
- Valheim
- Death Stranding
- Last Man Standing
- Rainbow Six Siege
- Assassin's Creed Valhalla
- Overwatch
- Grand Theft Auto V
- Apex Legends
- Cyberpunk 2077
- Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and Warzone
- Fallout 76
- Red Dead Redemption 2
- Borderlands 3
- Watch Dogs Legion
After looking at the data of all benchmarks and videos, you can already make an briefed decision about which CPU is better to buy for gaming AMD EPYC 9174F or AMD EPYC 7642.
Summary benchmark resultsAs a percentage of the maximum value based on a sample from the entire base of all processors
Processor Benchmark
| EPYC 7642 | 68% |
EPYC 9174F | 66% |
This parameter shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, EPYC 7642 is 2% better than EPYC 9174F. The data source is several popular tests. More detailed information of the benchmarks is below.
Gaming performance
Summary result of all game benchmarks.| EPYC 7642 | 73% |
EPYC 9174F | 70% |
For the maximum in this test, the results of the most powerful processor in the site database are taken. And of course, this is a server processor, on which no one will play games. Because the cost of this processor reaches several tens of thousands of dollars. And if it seems to you that the selected CPU has a low game result, just 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: Hitman 3, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Battlefield V, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO), Microsoft Flight Simulator, League of Legends (LOL), DOTA 2A, Monster Hunter World, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), Forza Horizon 4, Horizon Zero Dawn, Half-Life: Alyx, Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, Ghostrunner, Metro Exodus, NBA 2K20, Control, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt.
Gaming benchmark| Fortnite | 129.7 | 123.8 | | Valorant | 147.3 | 140.7 | | Cyberpunk 2077 | 82.5 | 78.8 | | Apex Legends | 138.5 | 132.2 | | Call of Duty Warzone | 110.5 | 105.5 | | Overwatch | 119.3 | 113.9 | | Red Dead Redemption 2 | 101.7 | 97.1 | | DOOM Eternal | 73.7 | 70.3 | | Warzone | 114.9 | 109.7 | | Assassin's Creed | 123.8 | 118.2 | | Valheim | 122.3 | 116.7 |
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 comparing not only were the equipped with different amounts of RAM and different video cards. But users also tested them at different screen resolutions: 4K, 2K or FullHD. Therefore, 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 7642 | 13% |
EPYC 9174F | 18% |
To make a finishing resolution on which processor is better, you should also consider the generation of its core. It is clear that the newer the generation, the better the performance of the processor in games and benchmarks, as well as its energy efficiency. In this case the EPYC 9174F is more energy efficient than the EPYC 7642 since it has less power consumption: 225W vs. 320W. Power consumption is especially important for laptops. And TDP should be taken into account when choosing a processor cooling system. 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 benchmarksFor example you want to use the processor not only for gaming, but also for programming, machine learning, streaming, video editing or video rendering, then first of all you need to pay attention to the performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, the processor uses all cores and threads that it has to the maximum to achieve maximum performance. You will learn this data from the benchmark tables below. Before using the data from these tests, be sure to check whether the program you are going to use on your computer supports multi-threaded mode. Since there are still many programs that can use only one core to work, and all the advantages 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 7642 |
AMD EPYC 9174F | | Cinbench 15 Single-core | 177 | 134 | | Cinbench 15 Multi-core | 7594 | 6722 | | Cinbench 20 Single-core | 443 | 277 | | Cinbench 20 Multi-core | 16104 | 14279 | | Cinbench 23 Single-core | 844 | 727 | | Cinbench 23 Multi-core | 41890 | 37179 |
Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | AMD EPYC 7642 |
AMD EPYC 9174F | | Single-Core | 2404 | 1672 | | Multi-Core | 61546 | 54549 |
GeekBench 6, 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | AMD EPYC 7642 |
AMD EPYC 9174F | | Single-Core | 918 | 1781 | | Multi-Core | 40836 | 35081 |
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 later the processor is released, the longer it will last in your computer. And the easier it will be to upgrade the system in the future. The same benefits from the presence of overclocking. When the processor can be overclocked, increasing its performance, then it will continue to maintain maximum FPS in the newest games. The savings are obvious! It turns out that there is no longer a need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer.
| AMD EPYC 7642 |
AMD EPYC 9174F | | Announcement date | October 01, 2020 | November 10, 2022 | | Type | Server | Server | | Socket | SP3 | SP5 | | Core name | Rome | Genoa | | Architecture | Zen 2 | Zen 4 | | Generation | 2 | 4 | | Turbo Frequency | 3.3 MHz | 4.4 MHz | | Frequency | 2.3 MHz | 4.1 MHz | | Cores | 48 | 16 | | Threads | 96 | 32 | | Bus rate | | | | Bit | 64 | 64 | | Lithography | 7 nm | 5 nm | | Transistors count | 64000 millions | 64000 millions | | Power consumption (TDP) | 225 W | 320 W | | Memory type | DDR4 | DDR5 | | Max. Memory | | 4096 Gb | | Memory Frequency | 3200 | 4800 | | Memory bandwidth | 208 GByte/s | 204.8 GB/s | | L1 cache | | | | L2 cache | | | | L3 cache | 256MB | 256MB | | Overclocking | No | No | | Supports ECC | No | Yes | | Part number | 100-000000074
100-100000074WOF | 100-000000796
100-100000796WOF |
In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here EPYC 9174F is 43% better than EPYC 7642 in terms of CPU frequency. Another difference is that EPYC 7642 has 32 more core than EPYC 9174F. 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 7642 is better: 24
The number of parameters for which AMD EPYC 9174F is better: 9
Although it should be realized that all the number in the text above do not mean that taking them into account you should fully trust a simple comparison of these numbers. Better to watch benchmarks video and read the opinion of real owners of AMD EPYC 7642 and AMD EPYC 9174F before making a choice which processor to buy for gaming and which not.
AMD EPYC 7642 Processor Comparisons
• Vs Xeon E5-2697R v4
• Vs EPYC 9454
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 9274F
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs EPYC 7542
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs EPYC 7352
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs EPYC 7402
• Vs EPYC 7252
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs EPYC 7532
• Vs EPYC 7232P
• Vs Xeon D-1602
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs EPYC 9634
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs EPYC 9224
• Vs EPYC 9354P
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs EPYC 9554
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs EPYC 7552
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8260M
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs EPYC 9554P
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs EPYC 7702
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs EPYC 9454P
• Vs EPYC 9254
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs EPYC 9374F
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs EPYC 9534
• Vs EPYC 9334
• Vs EPYC 9354
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs EPYC 9654
• Vs EPYC 7262
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs Xeon E-2234
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs EPYC 9124
• Vs EPYC 9474F
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• 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+
AMD EPYC 9174F Processor Comparisons
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs Xeon E-2234
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 9654
• Vs EPYC 9124
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs EPYC 9224
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs EPYC 7702
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs Xeon E5-2697R v4
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs EPYC 9634
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs EPYC 9534
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• Vs EPYC 9554P
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs EPYC 9554
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs Xeon D-1602
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8260M
• Vs EPYC 9254
• Vs EPYC 9274F
• Vs EPYC 9334
• Vs EPYC 9354
• Vs EPYC 9354P
• Vs EPYC 9374F
• Vs EPYC 9454
• 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 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+
|
|
|
