AMD EPYC 9474F vs AMD EPYC 7F32

Processor comparisons 15-03-2023

   Let's say you can't decide which processor to buy, you can make a decision after reading the comprehensive tests AMD EPYC 9474F vs AMD EPYC 7F32 and understand which is better for games or simple use for machine learning, programming, rendering, video editing, streaming. Here is all information from many benchmarks or real video editing and streaming tests. A thorough review of all the technical characteristics, to make it easier to read, is summarized in the table.
   From the video comparison, you can get the results of parallel examination in software tests like World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, AIDA64, DaVinci Resolve Studio, Prime95, Dolphin Emulator, Handbrake, PCMark 10, 3DMark, RealBench, Furmark, UserBenchmark, Blender, Cinebench 23 (20, 15), PassMark, Gears 5, MATLAB, VeraCrypt, WPrime, Blender, GeekBench 6, 5.2, 7zip, SuperPi.
   Gaming performance of processors in:

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

After looking at the data these benchmarks and videos, you already be able to understand which processor is better to buy for gaming AMD EPYC 7F32 or AMD EPYC 9474F.

Summary benchmark results

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

EPYC 9474F

77%

EPYC 7F32

56%

The number of this parameter shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, EPYC 9474F is 27% better than EPYC 7F32. The data source is several popular tests. More detailed information of the benchmarks is below.

Gaming performance
Summary result of all game benchmarks.

EPYC 9474F

85%

EPYC 7F32

61%

The maximum result in this parameter is 100 percent, which is the performance of the most powerful processor currently available. 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. Therefore, if you think that the selected CPU has a small game result, look at the FPS that it produces in real games in the summary 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	150.1	108.2
Valorant	170.6	122.9
Cyberpunk 2077	95.5	68.8
Apex Legends	160.3	115.5
Call of Duty Warzone	127.9	92.2
Overwatch	138.1	99.6
Red Dead Redemption 2	117.7	84.8
DOOM Eternal	85.3	61.5
Warzone	133.0	95.9
Assassin's Creed	143.3	103.3
Valheim	141.6	102.0

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 that were in the comparisons not only did they have different amounts of RAM and different video cards. But users also tested them at different screen resolutions: 4K, 2K or FullHD. 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 9474F

16%

EPYC 7F32

22%

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 EPYC 7F32 is more energy efficient than the EPYC 9474F as it consumes less power: 360W vs. 180W. Power consumption is particularly important for laptops. Also, when choosing a processor cooling system, it will be useful to 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 benchmarks

Let's say you plan to use the processor not only for gaming, but also for streaming, programming, video editing or video rendering, machine learning, then first of all you need to pay attention to the performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, to achieve maximum performance, the processor turns on all threads and cores that it has. You will learn this data from the benchmark tables below. Before you take into account 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. Since there are still many programs that use only one core to work, and all the benefit of multi-core mode turns out to be unnecessary.

Cinebench 23, 20 an 15
The results of this benchmark show Single-threaded and Multi-threaded CPU performance

	AMD EPYC 9474F	AMD EPYC 7F32
Cinbench 15 Single-core	246	67
Cinbench 15 Multi-core	11139	2750
Cinbench 20 Single-core	484	446
Cinbench 20 Multi-core	23633	5829
Cinbench 23 Single-core	1229	308
Cinbench 23 Multi-core	61496	15159

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

	AMD EPYC 9474F	AMD EPYC 7F32
Single-Core	2790	2422
Multi-Core	90217	22236

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

	AMD EPYC 9474F	AMD EPYC 7F32
Single-Core	1762	1209
Multi-Core	60869	19778

Comparison of specifications

In the specification comparison table, the most helpful will be the release date of the processor and the possibility of overclocking it. The later the processor is released, 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. If the processor can be overclocked, increasing its performance, then it will continue to maintain maximum FPS even in new games. The savings are obvious! It turns out that you do not need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer.

	AMD EPYC 9474F	AMD EPYC 7F32
Announcement date	November 10, 2022	October 01, 2020
Type	Server	Server
Socket	SP5	SP3
Core name	Genoa	Rome
Architecture	Zen 4	Zen 2
Generation	4	2
Turbo Frequency	4.1 MHz	3.9 MHz
Frequency	3.6 MHz	3.7 MHz
Cores	48	8
Threads	96	16
Bus rate
Bit	64	64
Lithography	5 nm	7 nm
Transistors count	64000 millions	38000 millions
Power consumption (TDP)	360 W	180 W
Memory type	DDR5	DDR4
Max. Memory	4096 Gb
Memory Frequency	4800
Memory bandwidth	460.8 GB/s
L1 cache
L2 cache
L3 cache	256MB	128MB
Overclocking	No	Yes
Supports ECC	Yes	No
Part number	100-000000788 100-000000788WOF	100-000000139 100-000000139WOF

In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here EPYC 7F32 is 2% better than EPYC 9474F in terms of CPU frequency. Another difference is that EPYC 9474F has 40 more core than EPYC 7F32. 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 9474F is better: 33
The number of parameters for which AMD EPYC 7F32 is better: 3
However, it should be realized that all the data in the text above do not mean that taking them into account you should entirely trust a simple quantitative comparison. Be sure to watch the testing video and read the opinion of of people who bought AMD EPYC 9474F and AMD EPYC 7F32 before making a decision which CPU to buy for gaming and which not.

AMD EPYC 9474F - all data

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

• AMD EPYC 9474F specs and review.

• AMD EPYC 7F32 specs and review.

AMD EPYC 9474F Processor Comparisons
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs Xeon D-1602
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs EPYC 9454P
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs Xeon E-2234
• Vs EPYC 9354P
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8260M
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs EPYC 9554P
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs EPYC 9534
• Vs EPYC 9654
• Vs EPYC 9554
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs EPYC 9334
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs EPYC 9224
• Vs EPYC 9454
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs EPYC 9374F
• Vs EPYC 7702
• Vs EPYC 9274F
• Vs EPYC 9174F
• Vs EPYC 9634
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs EPYC 9354
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• Vs EPYC 9254
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs EPYC 9124
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs Xeon E5-2697R v4
• 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+

AMD EPYC 7F32 Processor Comparisons
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• 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 2990X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
• Vs Core i9-7940X
• Vs Core i9-7960X
• Vs Core i7-11700K
• Vs Ryzen 7 Pro 5850U
• Vs Ryzen 7 5700G
• Vs Core i9-11900K
• Vs Core i9-9940X
• Vs Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G
• Vs Ryzen 7 5800X
• Vs Apple M1X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX
• Vs Core i9-10940X
• Vs Core i9-7980XE
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 2950X
• Vs Ryzen 9 3900
• Vs Ryzen 7 5800U
• Vs Ryzen 5 5600X
• Vs Apple M1
• Vs Ryzen 5 5600G
• Vs Ryzen 7 5800
• Vs Ryzen 9 4900U
• Vs Core i5-11600K
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 4750GE
• Vs Core i7-10700K
• Vs Ryzen 7 4800H
• Vs Ryzen 5 3600XT
• Vs Core i9-9900K
• Vs Xeon E5-2697R v4
• 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 Core i5-10600
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 4400GE
• Vs Core i7-10870H
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs Xeon W-2275
• Vs Ryzen 5 4600HS
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs Core i7-11800H
• Vs Core i9-11900KF
• Vs Core i9-11900
• Vs Core i9-11900F
• Vs Core i9-11900T
• Vs Core i7-11700KF
• 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 9 5600X
• Vs Ryzen 7 5700U
• Vs Ryzen 5 5600H
• Vs Ryzen 7 5800HS
• Vs Core i9-10900KF
• Vs Core i9-7920X
• 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 Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 4700G
• Vs Ryzen 7 4700G
• Vs Ryzen 9 4900H
• Vs Ryzen 9 4900HS
• Vs Ryzen 7 4800HS
• Vs Ryzen 7 4700GE
• Vs Core i5-1155G7
• Vs Core i5-11500B
• Vs Core i5-11500H
• Vs Core i7-11850H
• Vs Core i5-12600H
• Vs Core i5-1240P
• Vs Core i5-1250P
• Vs Core i7-1260P
• Vs Core i7-1270P
• Vs Core i7-1280P
• Vs Core i5-12450H
• Vs Core i5-12500H
• Vs Core i5-12400
• Vs Core i5-12400F
• Vs Core i5-12400T
• Vs Core i5-12500
• Vs Core i5-12500E
• Vs Core i5-12500TE
• Vs Core i5-12500T
• Vs Core i5-12600
• Vs Core i5-12600T
• Vs Core i3-12100
• Vs Core i3-12100F
• Vs Core i3-12300HE
• Vs Core i3-12300
• Vs Ryzen 5 6600H
• Vs Ryzen 5 6600HS
• Vs Ryzen 5 6600U
• Vs Ryzen 7 5825U
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G
• Vs Ryzen 7 Pro 5750GE
• Vs Core i7-1270PE
• Vs Core i5-12500HL
• Vs Core i5-12450HX
• Vs Core i5-1250PE
• Vs Core i3-12300HL
• 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 9454
• Vs EPYC 9454P
• 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+