 |
AMD EPYC 9174F vs Intel Xeon D-1602 |
|
Processor comparisons 11-03-2023
If you can't decide which processor to buy, you can make a decision after reading the full tests AMD EPYC 9174F vs Intel Xeon D-1602 and decide which is better for games or normal use for video editing, streaming, rendering, programming, machine learning. Here you can find useful information from real streaming and video editing tests or various benchmarks. A step-by-step analysis of all the technical characteristics, to make it easier to understand, is summarized in the table.
From the comparison video, you can get the results of joint testing in special testing software like Furmark, PassMark, SuperPi, World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, UserBenchmark, Prime95, DaVinci Resolve Studio, Blender, Blender, 7zip, Handbrake, VeraCrypt, Cinebench 23 (20, 15), Gears 5, RealBench, GeekBench 6, 5.2, WPrime, MATLAB, PCMark 10, Dolphin Emulator, AIDA64, 3DMark.
And how good the processors are in games: - Red Dead Redemption 2
- Fortnite
- Last Man Standing
- Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and Warzone
- DOOM: Eternal
- Apex Legends
- Valorant
- Halo Infinite
- Grand Theft Auto V
- Overwatch
- Cyberpunk 2077
- World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
- Watch Dogs Legion
- Death Stranding
- Borderlands 3
- Rainbow Six Siege
- Fallout 76
- Valheim
- Assassin's Creed Valhalla
After reading the results of parallel benchmarks and videos, you can already make an briefed decision about which processor is better to buy for gaming Intel Xeon D-1602 or AMD EPYC 9174F.
Summary benchmark resultsAs a percentage of the maximum value based on a sample from the entire base of all processors
Processor Benchmark
| EPYC 9174F | 66% |
Xeon D-1602 | 50% |
This parameter shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, EPYC 9174F is 24% better than Xeon D-1602. The data source is several popular tests. Detailed information can be found below.
Gaming performance
Summary result of all game benchmarks.| EPYC 9174F | 70% |
Xeon D-1602 | 50% |
For the maximum in this test, the results of the most powerful processor in the site database are taken. And it is clear that this is a server processor, on which no one will run 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 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: Metro Exodus, League of Legends (LOL), Horizon Zero Dawn, Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, Hitman 3, Half-Life: Alyx, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO), Battlefield V, Forza Horizon 4, NBA 2K20, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), Control, DOTA 2A, Monster Hunter World, Ghostrunner, Microsoft Flight Simulator, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Shadow of the Tomb Raider.
Gaming benchmark| Fortnite | 123.8 | 88.9 | | Valorant | 140.7 | 101.0 | | Cyberpunk 2077 | 78.8 | 56.5 | | Apex Legends | 132.2 | 94.9 | | Call of Duty Warzone | 105.5 | 75.7 | | Overwatch | 113.9 | 81.8 | | Red Dead Redemption 2 | 97.1 | 69.7 | | DOOM Eternal | 70.3 | 50.5 | | Warzone | 109.7 | 78.8 | | Assassin's Creed | 118.2 | 84.8 | | Valheim | 116.7 | 83.8 |
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 tested computers not only did they have different video cards and different amounts of RAM. But users also tested them at different screen resolutions: FullHD, 2K or 4K. Therefore, the game benchmark data is approximate. But all video cards met the average system requirements of games. To be sure exactly how much performance 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 9174F | 18% |
Xeon D-1602 | 32% |
To make a finishing resolution 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 D-1602 is more energy efficient than the EPYC 9174F as it consumes less power: 320W vs. 27W. Power consumption is particularly important for laptops. And TDP should be taken into account when choosing a processor cooling system. 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 benchmarksIf you plan to use the processor not only for gaming, but also for programming, streaming, video editing or video rendering, machine learning, then the main parameter for you is its performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, to achieve maximum efficiency, the CPU includes all cores and threads that it has. You will find out this data from the benchmark tables below. Before using the data from these tests, be sure to find out whether the program that you are going to use on your computer can work in 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 9174F |
Intel Xeon D-1602 | | Cinbench 15 Single-core | 134 | 60 | | Cinbench 15 Multi-core | 6722 | 215 | | Cinbench 20 Single-core | 277 | 134 | | Cinbench 20 Multi-core | 14279 | 435 | | Cinbench 23 Single-core | 727 | 333 | | Cinbench 23 Multi-core | 37179 | 1219 |
Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | AMD EPYC 9174F |
Intel Xeon D-1602 | | Single-Core | 1672 | 1420 | | Multi-Core | 54549 | 2466 |
GeekBench 6, 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | AMD EPYC 9174F |
Intel Xeon D-1602 | | Single-Core | 1781 | 264 | | Multi-Core | 35081 | 846 |
Comparison of specifications
In the specification comparison table, the most useful will be the release date of the processor and the possibility of overclocking it. The newer the processor, the longer it will last in your computer. And the easier it will be to upgrade the system later. The same can be said about overclocking. If the processor can be overclocked, increasing its performance, then it will still be able to produce maximum FPS in the newest games. The savings are obvious! Accordingly, there is no longer a need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer.
| AMD EPYC 9174F |
Intel Xeon D-1602 | | Announcement date | November 10, 2022 | October 01, 2020 | | Type | Server | Server | | Socket | SP5 | FCBGA1667 | | Core name | Genoa | Hewitt Lake | | Architecture | Zen 4 | x86 | | Generation | 4 | 3 | | Turbo Frequency | 4.4 MHz | 3.2 MHz | | Frequency | 4.1 MHz | 2.5 MHz | | Cores | 16 | 2 | | Threads | 32 | 4 | | Bus rate | | | | Bit | 64 | 64 | | Lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm | | Transistors count | 64000 millions | 2460 millions | | Power consumption (TDP) | 320 W | 27 W | | Memory type | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR3 | | Max. Memory | 4096 Gb | 128 Gb | | Memory Frequency | 4800 | | | Memory bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | | | L1 cache | | | | L2 cache | | | | L3 cache | 256MB | 3 MB | | Overclocking | No | yes | | Supports ECC | Yes | Yes | | Part number | 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 39% better than Xeon D-1602 in terms of CPU frequency. Another difference is that EPYC 9174F has 14 more core than Xeon D-1602. 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 9174F is better: 32
The number of parameters for which Intel Xeon D-1602 is better: 2
However, it should be realized that all the number in the table above do not mean that taking them into account you should fully trust a simple quantitative comparison. Better to watch benchmarks video and read the reviews of real owners of AMD EPYC 9174F and Intel Xeon D-1602 before making a selection which processor to buy for gaming and which not.
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 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 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 D-1602 Processor Comparisons
• Vs Pentium 6805
• Vs Core i5-5200U
• Vs 3020e
• Vs 3015e
• Vs Celeron G5900
• Vs Celeron G5920
• Vs Celeron G5905
• Vs Pentium J6426
• Vs Core i5-6200U
• Vs Athlon Silver 3050e
• Vs Athlon Silver 3050U
• Vs Core i5-6300U
• Vs Ryzen Embedded R1305G
• Vs Pentium Gold G6405U
• Vs Core i5-7200U
• Vs Pentium Silver A1030
• Vs Core i3-10110Y
• Vs Core i7-7500U
• Vs Pentium Silver J5040
• Vs Core i5-2400
• Vs Pentium N6415
• Vs Pentium Gold G6405T
• Vs Pentium Gold G6505T
• Vs Pentium Silver N6000
• Vs FX-6300 Six-Core
• Vs Athlon PRO 200U
• Vs Pentium Gold G6405
• Vs Pentium Silver N6005
• Vs Pentium Gold G6500
• Vs Pentium Gold G6505
• Vs Core i5-3210M
• Vs Celeron J3455E
• Vs Celeron 6305
• Vs Pentium N4200E
• Vs A6-9550
• Vs Celeron N5100
• Vs Celeron N4500
• Vs Athlon Silver 3050C
• Vs Celeron N5095
• Vs Celeron N5205U
• Vs Celeron N4020
• Vs Pentium Silver N5030
• Vs Core i3-L13G4
• Vs Core i5-L16G7
• Vs Athlon Gold 3150C
• Vs Pentium 6405U
• Vs Core m3-8100Y
• Vs Core i3-7102E
• Vs Core i3-6102E
• Vs Core i5-4230U
• Vs Core2 Extreme Q9200
• Vs Core i3-2105
• Vs Core i5-8210Y
• Vs Core i3-7167U
• Vs Core i3-7020U
• Vs Core i5-8200Y
• Vs Core i7-8500Y
• 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 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 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+
|
|
|
