 |
AMD EPYC 9654 vs Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 |
|
Processor comparisons 11-03-2023
You may have difficulties with the choice of a CPU, you will solve them by reading the full tests AMD EPYC 9654 vs Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 and see which is better for games or normal use for rendering, programming, machine learning, video editing, streaming. Here is all information from real streaming and video editing tests or different benchmarks. A careful review of all the specifications, to make it easier to understand, is made by the table.
From the video comparison, you can get the results of parallel examination in special testing software such as Dolphin Emulator, DaVinci Resolve Studio, Furmark, Prime95, Handbrake, World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, GeekBench 6, 5.2, Blender, Gears 5, MATLAB, VeraCrypt, UserBenchmark, RealBench, 7zip, WPrime, Cinebench 23 (20, 15), SuperPi, PCMark 10, AIDA64, PassMark, 3DMark, Blender.
Gaming performance of processors in: - Last Man Standing
- World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
- Assassin's Creed Valhalla
- Borderlands 3
- Apex Legends
- Red Dead Redemption 2
- DOOM: Eternal
- Valheim
- Fortnite
- Valorant
- Watch Dogs Legion
- Grand Theft Auto V
- Overwatch
- Halo Infinite
- Rainbow Six Siege
- Death Stranding
- Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and Warzone
- Cyberpunk 2077
- Fallout 76
After looking at the data of joint benchmarks and videos, you already be able to know which CPU is better to buy for gaming Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 or AMD EPYC 9654.
Summary benchmark resultsAs a percentage of the maximum value based on a sample from the entire base of all processors
Processor Benchmark
| EPYC 9654 | 99% |
Xeon E5-2697R v4 | 55% |
The number of this parameter shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, EPYC 9654 is 44% better than Xeon E5-2697R v4. The data source is several popular tests. More detailed information of the benchmarks is below.
Gaming performance
Summary result of all game benchmarks.| EPYC 9654 | 99% |
Xeon E5-2697R v4 | 61% |
The maximum result in this parameter is 100 percent, which is the performance of the most powerful processor at the moment. 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. Therefore, if you think 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 less popular games in which CPU comparisons were performed: Horizon Zero Dawn, DOTA 2A, Half-Life: Alyx, Control, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Ghostrunner, Hitman 3, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Battlefield V, Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, Microsoft Flight Simulator, Forza Horizon 4, Metro Exodus, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO), League of Legends (LOL), Monster Hunter World, NBA 2K20.
Gaming benchmark| Fortnite | 176.0 | 108.6 | | Valorant | 200.0 | 123.4 | | Cyberpunk 2077 | 112.0 | 69.1 | | Apex Legends | 188.0 | 116.0 | | Call of Duty Warzone | 150.0 | 92.6 | | Overwatch | 162.0 | 100.0 | | Red Dead Redemption 2 | 138.0 | 85.2 | | DOOM Eternal | 100.0 | 61.7 | | Warzone | 156.0 | 96.3 | | Assassin's Creed | 168.0 | 103.7 | | Valheim | 166.0 | 102.5 |
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 video cards and different amounts of RAM. But users also tested them at different screen resolutions: 2K, 4K 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 compare it in one assembly with the video card that is installed in your computer.
Power consumption
| EPYC 9654 | 13% |
Xeon E5-2697R v4 | 20% |
To make a final 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 E5-2697R v4 is more energy efficient than the EPYC 9654 since it has less power consumption: 360W vs. 145W. Power consumption is especially important for laptops. Also, when choosing a processor cooling system, you need 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, video rendering or video editing, machine learning, streaming, then first of all you need to pay attention to the performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, to achieve maximum efficiency, the processor uses all threads and cores that it has. You will find out this data from the benchmark tables below. Before you take into account the data from these tests, be sure to make sure that the program that you are going to use on your computer can work in multi-threaded mode. Because there are still many programs that use only one core to run, 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 9654 |
Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 | | Cinbench 15 Single-core | 495 | 108 | | Cinbench 15 Multi-core | 20361 | 3177 | | Cinbench 20 Single-core | 930 | 240 | | Cinbench 20 Multi-core | 43157 | 7475 | | Cinbench 23 Single-core | 2281 | 641 | | Cinbench 23 Multi-core | 112225 | 18061 |
Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | AMD EPYC 9654 |
Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 | | Single-Core | 4805 | 1916 | | Multi-Core | 164622 | 18383 |
GeekBench 6, 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | AMD EPYC 9654 |
Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 | | Single-Core | 1502 | 910 | | Multi-Core | 86274 | 20218 |
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 can be said about overclocking. If the processor can be overclocked, increasing its performance, then it will still be able to produce maximum FPS even in the newest games. Accordingly, you do not need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer. The economy are obvious!
| AMD EPYC 9654 |
Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 | | Announcement date | November 10, 2022 | January 01, 2021 | | Type | Server | Server | | Socket | SP5 | FCLGA2011-3 | | Core name | Genoa | Broadwell | | Architecture | Zen 4 | x86 | | Generation | 4 | 4 | | Turbo Frequency | 3.7 MHz | 3.6 MHz | | Frequency | 2.4 MHz | 2.3 MHz | | Cores | 96 | 18 | | Threads | 192 | 36 | | Bus rate | | 9.6 GT/s | | Bit | 64 | 64 | | Lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm | | Transistors count | 116000 millions | 4130 millions | | Power consumption (TDP) | 360 W | 145 W | | Memory type | DDR5 | DDR4 1600/1866/2133/2400 | | Max. Memory | | 15 Gb | | Memory Frequency | 4800 | | | Memory bandwidth | 460.8 | 76.8 GB/s | | L1 cache | | | | L2 cache | | | | L3 cache | 384MB | 45 MB | | Overclocking | No | Yes | | Supports ECC | Yes | Yes | | Part number | 100-000000789
100-100000789WOF | |
In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here EPYC 9654 is 4% better than Xeon E5-2697R v4 in terms of CPU frequency. Another difference is that EPYC 9654 has 78 more core than Xeon E5-2697R v4. 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 9654 is better: 29
The number of parameters for which Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 is better: 6
All the data in the article above do not mean that taking them into account you should entirely trust a simple comparison of these figures. Better to watch benchmarks video and read the reviews of of people who bought AMD EPYC 9654 and Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 before making a decision which processor to buy for gaming and which not.
AMD EPYC 9654 Processor Comparisons
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8260M
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs Xeon E-2234
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs EPYC 7702
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs Xeon D-1602
• 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 E5-2697R v4 Processor Comparisons
• Vs Core i7-9700E
• Vs Ryzen 7 5800
• Vs Core i9-9900K
• Vs Ryzen 5 3600XT
• Vs Ryzen 7 4800H
• Vs Core i7-10700K
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 4750GE
• Vs Core i5-11600K
• Vs Ryzen 9 4900U
• Vs Ryzen 5 5600G
• Vs Apple M1
• Vs Ryzen 5 5600X
• Vs Ryzen 7 5800U
• 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 1950X
• Vs Core i9-7940X
• Vs Core i9-7960X
• Vs Core i7-11700K
• Vs Ryzen 7 Pro 5850U
• 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 Ryzen 5 3500X
• Vs Ryzen 5 2600
• Vs Core i7-8700
• Vs Ryzen 3 3300X
• Vs Core i7-10750H
• Vs Core i5-10400F
• Vs Core i5-10400
• Vs Ryzen 5 1600
• Vs Ryzen 3 4300GE
• Vs Ryzen 3 3100
• Vs Core i5-1145G7
• Vs Core i7-1160G7
• Vs Ryzen 5 4500U
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs Core i5-10600
• Vs Core i5-10500
• Vs Core i7-10700T
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 4400GE
• Vs Core i7-10870H
• Vs Ryzen 5 4600HS
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs Ryzen 5 4600U
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs Core i7-11800H
• Vs Core i9-11900T
• 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 5 5600HS
• Vs Ryzen 5 5500U
• Vs Ryzen 7 5700U
• Vs Ryzen 5 5600H
• Vs Ryzen 5 5600U
• 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 Core i9-10900T
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 4700G
• Vs Core i9-9900KF
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 3600
• Vs Ryzen 7 4700G
• Vs Core i7-9800X
• Vs Ryzen 9 4900H
• Vs Ryzen 9 4900HS
• Vs Ryzen 7 4800HS
• Vs Ryzen 7 4700GE
• Vs Ryzen 7 Extreme Edition
• Vs Core i7-7820X
• Vs Ryzen 7 4800U
• Vs Core i7-6950X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
• Vs Core i9-9900
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 2700X
• Vs Core i9-10980HK
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 4650G
• Vs Core i9-10885H
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 4400G
• Vs Ryzen 7 1800X
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE
• Vs Ryzen 5 4600GE
• Vs Core i9-10900TE
• Vs Core i9-10900E
• Vs Core i5-1155G7
• Vs Core i5-11500B
• Vs Core i5-11400H
• Vs Core i5-11500H
• Vs Core i7-12700H
• Vs Core i5-1230U
• Vs Core i5-1240U
• Vs Core i7-1250U
• Vs Core i5-1235U
• Vs Core i5-1245U
• Vs Core i7-1255U
• Vs Core i7-1260U
• Vs Core i7-1265U
• Vs Core i3-1220P
• Vs Core i5-1240P
• Vs Core i5-1250P
• Vs Core i3-12100
• Vs Core i3-12100E
• Vs Core i3-12100F
• Vs Core i3-12100T
• Vs Core i3-12100TE
• Vs Core i3-12300T
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 5875U
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 5675U
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 5650GE
• Vs Core i7-1265UE
• Vs Core i7-1265UL
• Vs Core i7-1255UL
• Vs Core i5-1235UL
• Vs Core i5-1245UL
• Vs Core i5-1245UE
• Vs Core i3-1220PE
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• 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 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+
|
|
|
