 |
AMD EPYC 7F72 vs Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M |
|
Processor comparisons 11-03-2023
Perhaps you are thinking about choosing a CPU, you will be able to make a choice after reading the detailed tests AMD EPYC 7F72 vs Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M and see which is better for games or simple use for video editing, streaming, programming, machine learning, rendering. Here is useful information from various benchmarks or real video editing and streaming tests. A step-by-step analysis of all the technical characteristics, to make it easier to read, is summarized in the table.
From the comparison video, you can get the results of parallel examination in special testing software like RealBench, Blender, Handbrake, World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, PCMark 10, VeraCrypt, 3DMark, AIDA64, GeekBench 6, 5.2, DaVinci Resolve Studio, Furmark, Cinebench 23 (20, 15), 7zip, Blender, WPrime, SuperPi, Dolphin Emulator, Gears 5, UserBenchmark, PassMark, MATLAB, Prime95.
Gaming performance of CPUs in: - World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
- Fallout 76
- Assassin's Creed Valhalla
- Borderlands 3
- Grand Theft Auto V
- Overwatch
- Rainbow Six Siege
- Death Stranding
- Apex Legends
- Valheim
- Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and Warzone
- Valorant
- Last Man Standing
- Halo Infinite
- Fortnite
- DOOM: Eternal
- Cyberpunk 2077
- Watch Dogs Legion
- Red Dead Redemption 2
After reading the results of joint benchmarks and videos, you already be able to figure out which processor is better to buy for gaming Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M or AMD EPYC 7F72.
Summary benchmark resultsAs a percentage of the maximum value based on a sample from the entire base of all processors
Processor Benchmark
| EPYC 7F72 | 67% |
Xeon Platinum 8260M | 60% |
The number of this parameter shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, EPYC 7F72 is 10% better than Xeon Platinum 8260M. The data source is several popular tests. More detailed information of the benchmarks is below.
Gaming performance
Summary result of all game benchmarks.| EPYC 7F72 | 71% |
Xeon Platinum 8260M | 69% |
The maximum result in this parameter is 100 percent, which is the performance of the most powerful processor currently available. And it is clear that 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. Therefore, if you think that the selected CPU has a low game result, look at the FPS that it produces in real games in the final table below.
List of less popular games in which processors were compared: Metro Exodus, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Ghostrunner, Hitman 3, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO), Control, NBA 2K20, Monster Hunter World, Forza Horizon 4, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), Battlefield V, Microsoft Flight Simulator, Horizon Zero Dawn, Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, League of Legends (LOL), Half-Life: Alyx, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, DOTA 2A.
Gaming benchmark| Fortnite | 126.7 | 121.9 | | Valorant | 143.9 | 138.5 | | Cyberpunk 2077 | 80.6 | 77.6 | | Apex Legends | 135.3 | 130.2 | | Call of Duty Warzone | 107.9 | 103.9 | | Overwatch | 116.6 | 112.2 | | Red Dead Redemption 2 | 99.3 | 95.6 | | DOOM Eternal | 72.0 | 69.3 | | Warzone | 112.3 | 108.1 | | Assassin's Creed | 120.9 | 116.4 | | Valheim | 119.5 | 115.0 |
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 video cards and different amounts of RAM. But users also tested them at different screen resolutions: 2K, FullHD or 4K. 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 compare it in one assembly with the video card that is installed in your computer.
Power consumption
| EPYC 7F72 | 16% |
Xeon Platinum 8260M | 21% |
To make a finishing choice 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 Xeon Platinum 8260M is more energy efficient than the EPYC 7F72 since it has less power consumption: 240W vs. 165W. Power consumption is particularly important for laptops. Also, when choosing a processor cooling system, you must know its TDP. It is necessary to count so that the TDP data specified in the cooler specification is greater than the TDP of the compared processor.
Software benchmarksFor example you want to use the processor not only for gaming, but also for video rendering or video editing, streaming, programming, machine learning, then the main parameter for you is its performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, the CPU uses all threads and cores that it has to the maximum to achieve maximum efficiency. You will learn this data from the benchmark tables below. Before you take into account the data from these tests, be sure to check whether the software 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 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 7F72 |
Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M | | Cinbench 15 Single-core | 172 | 211 | | Cinbench 15 Multi-core | 6991 | 5808 | | Cinbench 20 Single-core | 322 | 366 | | Cinbench 20 Multi-core | 14814 | 14048 | | Cinbench 23 Single-core | 786 | 1239 | | Cinbench 23 Multi-core | 38516 | 35899 |
Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | AMD EPYC 7F72 |
Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M | | Single-Core | 1763 | 2291 | | Multi-Core | 56496 | 34071 |
GeekBench 6, 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | AMD EPYC 7F72 |
Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M | | Single-Core | 1159 | 1071 | | Multi-Core | 37901 | 33238 |
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 you. And the easier it will be to upgrade the system later. 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 even in new games. Accordingly, you do not need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer. The economy are obvious!
| AMD EPYC 7F72 |
Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M | | Announcement date | April 14, 2020 | October 01, 2020 | | Type | Server | Server | | Socket | SP3 | LGA3647 | | Core name | Rome | Cascade Lake | | Architecture | Zen 2 | x86 | | Generation | 2 | 2 | | Turbo Frequency | 3.7 MHz | 3.9 MHz | | Frequency | 3.2 MHz | 2.3 MHz | | Cores | 24 | 24 | | Threads | 48 | 48 | | Bus rate | | | | Bit | 64 | 64 | | Lithography | 7 nm | 14 nm | | Transistors count | 62000 millions | 7510 millions | | Power consumption (TDP) | 240 W | 165 W | | Memory type | DDR4 | DDR4-2933 | | Max. Memory | 4096 Gb | 1 Gb | | Memory Frequency | 3200 | | | Memory bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | | | L1 cache | | | | L2 cache | | | | L3 cache | 192MB | 35.75 MB | | Overclocking | No | Yes | | Supports ECC | No | Yes | | Part number | 100-000000141
100-000000141WOF | |
In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here EPYC 7F72 is 28% better than Xeon Platinum 8260M in terms of CPU frequency. 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 7F72 is better: 23
The number of parameters for which Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M is better: 10
However, it should be realized that all the data that you have looked at here do not mean that taking them into account you should completely trust a simple comparison of these numbers. Be sure to watch the testing video and read the opinion of of people who bought AMD EPYC 7F72 and Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M before making a decision which of the CPUs to buy for gaming.
AMD EPYC 7F72 Processor Comparisons
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs EPYC 7702
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs Xeon E5-2697R v4
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs Xeon E-2234
• Vs Xeon D-1602
• 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 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 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 Platinum 8260M Processor Comparisons
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs Ryzen 9 5900
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX
• Vs Ryzen 9 3950X
• Vs Ryzen 9 5900X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX
• Vs Ryzen 9 5950X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 3970X
• Vs Core i9-10980XE
• Vs Ryzen 9 3900XT
• Vs Ryzen 9 3900X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX
• Vs Core i9-9980XE
• Vs Xeon W-3175X
• Vs Core i9-9990XE
• Vs Ryzen 9 PRO 3900
• Vs Core i9-9960X
• Vs Ryzen 9 3900
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 2950X
• Vs Core i9-7980XE
• Vs Core i9-10940X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX
• Vs Apple M1X
• Vs Ryzen 7 5800X
• Vs Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G
• Vs Core i9-9940X
• Vs Core i9-11900K
• Vs Ryzen 7 5700G
• Vs Ryzen 7 Pro 5850U
• Vs Core i7-11700K
• Vs Core i9-7960X
• Vs Core i9-7940X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 2990X
• Vs Core i9-10920X
• Vs Ryzen 9 5980HX
• Vs Ryzen 9 5980HS
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs Xeon W-2275
• Vs Core i9-11900KF
• Vs Core i9-11900
• Vs Core i9-11900F
• Vs Ryzen 9 5800
• Vs Ryzen 9 5600X
• Vs Ryzen 9 5800X
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs Core i9-11900H
• Vs Core i9-11900KB
• Vs Core i9-11950H
• Vs Core i9-11980HK
• Vs Core i7-11700B
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs Core i9-12900K
• Vs Core i9-12900HK
• Vs Core i9-12900H
• Vs Core i7-12800H
• Vs Core i9-12900T
• Vs Core i9-12900TE
• Vs Core i7-12700E
• Vs Core i9-12900F
• Vs Core i9-12900E
• Vs Core i9-12900
• Vs Core i7-12700
• Vs Core i7-12700F
• Vs Core i7-12700TE
• Vs Core i7-12700T
• Vs Core i7-12700HE
• Vs Core i7-12700K
• Vs Core i7-12700KF
• Vs Core i5-12600KF
• Vs Core i5-12600K
• Vs Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 6850U
• Vs Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS
• Vs Core i7-12700HL
• Vs Core i7-12650HX
• Vs Core i7-12800HL
• Vs Core i7-12850HX
• Vs Ryzen 5 7600X
• Vs Core i5-13500
• Vs Core i5-13400
• Vs Apple M2
• Vs Apple M1 Pro
• Vs Apple M1 Max
• Vs Apple M2 Pro
• Vs Apple M2 Max
• Vs Core i5-13600
• Vs Core i7-13700HX
• 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 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 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+
|
|
|
