 |
AMD EPYC 9554 vs Intel Xeon D-1602 |
|
Processor comparisons 11-03-2023
Let's say you can't decide which processor to buy, you can make a decision after reading the full tests AMD EPYC 9554 vs Intel Xeon D-1602 and see which is better for games or normal use for machine learning, programming, video editing, streaming, rendering. Here is useful information from many 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 video comparison, you can get the results of parallel examination in special testing software such as World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, PCMark 10, DaVinci Resolve Studio, RealBench, GeekBench 6, 5.2, Cinebench 23 (20, 15), PassMark, Handbrake, 3DMark, Gears 5, VeraCrypt, Blender, MATLAB, Dolphin Emulator, 7zip, Furmark, SuperPi, UserBenchmark, AIDA64, Blender, Prime95, WPrime.
And how good the processors are in games: - Red Dead Redemption 2
- Valheim
- Cyberpunk 2077
- Death Stranding
- Watch Dogs Legion
- Rainbow Six Siege
- Valorant
- Grand Theft Auto V
- Fallout 76
- Fortnite
- Apex Legends
- DOOM: Eternal
- Borderlands 3
- World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
- Overwatch
- Halo Infinite
- Assassin's Creed Valhalla
- Last Man Standing
- Call of Duty: Warzone and Modern Warfare
After looking at the data of all benchmarks and videos, you already be able to figure out which processor is better to buy for gaming Intel Xeon D-1602 or AMD EPYC 9554.
Summary benchmark resultsAs a percentage of the maximum value based on a sample from the entire base of all processors
Processor Benchmark
| EPYC 9554 | 87% |
Xeon D-1602 | 50% |
This parameter shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, EPYC 9554 is 42% better than Xeon D-1602. The data source is several popular tests. More detailed information of the benchmarks is below.
Gaming performance
Summary result of all game benchmarks.| EPYC 9554 | 88% |
Xeon D-1602 | 50% |
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 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 little game result, look at the FPS that it produces in real games in the summary table below.
List of other games in which CPU comparisons were performed: Ghostrunner, Microsoft Flight Simulator, Half-Life: Alyx, Control, Metro Exodus, Forza Horizon 4, Battlefield V, League of Legends (LOL), Monster Hunter World, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, DOTA 2A, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO), Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, Horizon Zero Dawn, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), NBA 2K20, Hitman 3.
Gaming benchmark| Fortnite | 155.8 | 88.9 | | Valorant | 177.1 | 101.0 | | Cyberpunk 2077 | 99.2 | 56.5 | | Apex Legends | 166.4 | 94.9 | | Call of Duty Warzone | 132.8 | 75.7 | | Overwatch | 143.4 | 81.8 | | Red Dead Redemption 2 | 122.2 | 69.7 | | DOOM Eternal | 88.5 | 50.5 | | Warzone | 138.1 | 78.8 | | Assassin's Creed | 148.7 | 84.8 | | Valheim | 147.0 | 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 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: 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 9554 | 14% |
Xeon D-1602 | 32% |
To make a finishing 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 D-1602 is more energy efficient than the EPYC 9554 since it has less power consumption: 360W vs. 27W. 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 calculate 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, machine learning, video editing or video rendering, streaming, then the main parameter for you is its performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, the processor includes 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. Because there are still many programs that can use only one core to run, 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 9554 |
Intel Xeon D-1602 | | Cinbench 15 Single-core | 380 | 60 | | Cinbench 15 Multi-core | 15365 | 215 | | Cinbench 20 Single-core | 708 | 134 | | Cinbench 20 Multi-core | 32559 | 435 | | Cinbench 23 Single-core | 1726 | 333 | | Cinbench 23 Multi-core | 84655 | 1219 |
Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | AMD EPYC 9554 |
Intel Xeon D-1602 | | Single-Core | 3630 | 1420 | | Multi-Core | 124178 | 2466 |
GeekBench 6, 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | AMD EPYC 9554 |
Intel Xeon D-1602 | | Single-Core | 1560 | 264 | | Multi-Core | 66486 | 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 later the processor is released, 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, thereby increasing its performance, then it will continue to maintain maximum FPS even in new games. It turns out that you do not need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer. The economy are obvious!
| AMD EPYC 9554 |
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 | 3.75 MHz | 3.2 MHz | | Frequency | 3.1 MHz | 2.5 MHz | | Cores | 64 | 2 | | Threads | 128 | 4 | | Bus rate | | | | Bit | 64 | 64 | | Lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm | | Transistors count | 108000 millions | 2460 millions | | Power consumption (TDP) | 360 W | 27 W | | Memory type | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR3 | | Max. Memory | | 128 Gb | | Memory Frequency | 4800 | | | Memory bandwidth | 460.8 | | | L1 cache | | | | L2 cache | | | | L3 cache | 256MB | 3 MB | | Overclocking | No | yes | | Supports ECC | Yes | Yes | | Part number | 100-000000790
100-100000790WOF | |
In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here EPYC 9554 is 19% better than Xeon D-1602 in terms of CPU frequency. Another difference is that EPYC 9554 has 62 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 9554 is better: 31
The number of parameters for which Intel Xeon D-1602 is better: 3
Although it should be realized that the summary data in the article above do not mean that you should be guided entirely by them and trust a simple comparison of these numbers. Better to watch the video tests and read the reviews of of people who bought AMD EPYC 9554 and Intel Xeon D-1602 before making a selection which CPU to buy for gaming and which not.
AMD EPYC 9554 Processor Comparisons
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs EPYC 7702
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs Xeon E-2234
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs Xeon E5-2697R v4
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 9634
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs EPYC 9654
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8260M
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs EPYC 7713
• 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 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 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 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+
|
|
|
