 |
AMD EPYC 9654P vs AMD EPYC 7702 |
|
Processor comparisons 11-03-2023
Let's say you are thinking about choosing a processor, you will be able to make a decision after reading the comprehensive tests AMD EPYC 9654P vs AMD EPYC 7702 and see which is better for games or normal use for programming, video editing, machine learning, streaming, rendering. Here is all information from real streaming and video editing tests or several benchmarks. A thorough review of all the technical characteristics, to make it easier to read, is presented in the form of the table.
From the comparison video, you can get the results of parallel examination in special testing software like World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, Furmark, 3DMark, SuperPi, Blender, WPrime, MATLAB, Gears 5, Blender, PCMark 10, Cinebench 23 (20, 15), AIDA64, Dolphin Emulator, VeraCrypt, 7zip, UserBenchmark, GeekBench 6, 5.2, PassMark, Handbrake, DaVinci Resolve Studio, RealBench, Prime95.
And how good the processors are in games: - DOOM: Eternal
- Valheim
- Death Stranding
- Rainbow Six Siege
- World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
- Call of Duty: Warzone and Modern Warfare
- Fortnite
- Assassin's Creed Valhalla
- Grand Theft Auto V
- Cyberpunk 2077
- Borderlands 3
- Valorant
- Overwatch
- Apex Legends
- Watch Dogs Legion
- Last Man Standing
- Red Dead Redemption 2
- Fallout 76
- Halo Infinite
After reading the results of all benchmarks and videos, you already be able to figure out which processor is better to buy for gaming AMD EPYC 7702 or AMD EPYC 9654P.
Summary benchmark resultsAs a percentage of the maximum value based on a sample from the entire base of all processors
Processor Benchmark
| EPYC 9654P | 98% |
EPYC 7702 | 71% |
The number of this parameter shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, EPYC 9654P is 27% better than EPYC 7702. The data source is several popular tests. More detailed information of the benchmarks is below.
Gaming performance
Summary result of all game benchmarks.| EPYC 9654P | 98% |
EPYC 7702 | 81% |
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. And if it seems to you that the selected CPU has a small game result, just 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: Microsoft Flight Simulator, League of Legends (LOL), NBA 2K20, Hitman 3, Metro Exodus, Horizon Zero Dawn, Ghostrunner, Control, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Monster Hunter World, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO), DOTA 2A, Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, Battlefield V, Half-Life: Alyx, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Forza Horizon 4.
Gaming benchmark| Fortnite | 173.9 | 143.1 | | Valorant | 197.6 | 162.6 | | Cyberpunk 2077 | 110.7 | 91.0 | | Apex Legends | 185.8 | 152.8 | | Call of Duty Warzone | 148.2 | 121.9 | | Overwatch | 160.1 | 131.7 | | Red Dead Redemption 2 | 136.4 | 112.2 | | DOOM Eternal | 98.8 | 81.3 | | Warzone | 154.1 | 126.8 | | Assassin's Creed | 166.0 | 136.6 | | Valheim | 164.0 | 134.9 |
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 9654P | 14% |
EPYC 7702 | 17% |
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 7702 is more energy efficient than the EPYC 9654P as it consumes less power: 360W vs. 200W. Power consumption is especially important for laptops. And TDP should be taken into account when choosing a processor cooling system. 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 benchmarksFor example you want to use the processor not only for gaming, but also for streaming, programming, machine learning, video editing or video rendering, then first of all you need to pay attention to the performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, the CPU includes all threads and cores that it has to the maximum to reach maximum efficiency. You will learn this data from the benchmark tables below. Before using the data from these tests, be sure to find out whether the software 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 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 9654P |
AMD EPYC 7702 | | Cinbench 15 Single-core | 469 | 216 | | Cinbench 15 Multi-core | 19565 | 8896 | | Cinbench 20 Single-core | 887 | 406 | | Cinbench 20 Multi-core | 41479 | 18857 | | Cinbench 23 Single-core | 2185 | 996 | | Cinbench 23 Multi-core | 107871 | 49035 |
Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | AMD EPYC 9654P |
AMD EPYC 7702 | | Single-Core | 4612 | 2099 | | Multi-Core | 158238 | 71929 |
GeekBench 6, 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | AMD EPYC 9654P |
AMD EPYC 7702 | | Single-Core | 1586 | 1023 | | Multi-Core | 84216 | 53995 |
Comparison of specifications
In the specification comparison table, the most helpful will be the the possibility of overclocking it and release date of the processor. 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 benefits from the presence of overclocking. When the processor can be overclocked, thereby increasing its performance, then it will still be able to produce maximum FPS in the newest games. Accordingly, there is no longer a need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer. The savings are obvious!
| AMD EPYC 9654P |
AMD EPYC 7702 | | Announcement date | November 10, 2022 | April 01, 2020 | | Type | Server | Server | | Socket | SP5 | SP3 | | Core name | Genoa | Rome | | Architecture | Zen 4 | Zen | | Generation | 4 | 2 | | Turbo Frequency | 3.7 MHz | 3.4 MHz | | Frequency | 2.4 MHz | 2 MHz | | Cores | 96 | 64 | | Threads | 192 | 128 | | Bus rate | | | | Bit | 64 | 64 | | Lithography | 5 nm | 7 nm | | Transistors count | 116000 millions | 86000 millions | | Power consumption (TDP) | 360 W | 200 W | | Memory type | DDR5 | DDR4 | | Max. Memory | | | | Memory Frequency | 4800 | | | Memory bandwidth | 460.8 | | | L1 cache | | | | L2 cache | | | | L3 cache | 384MB | 256MB | | Overclocking | No | Yes | | Supports ECC | Yes | No | | Part number | 100-000000803
100-100000803WOF | 100-000000038
100-100000038WOF
|
In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here EPYC 9654P is 16% better than EPYC 7702 in terms of CPU frequency. Another difference is that EPYC 9654P has 32 more core than EPYC 7702. 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 9654P is better: 33
The number of parameters for which AMD EPYC 7702 is better: 2
However, it should be understood that all the number in the table above do not mean that taking them into account you should completely trust a simple quantitative comparison. Be sure to watch the video tests and read the opinion of real owners of AMD EPYC 9654P and AMD EPYC 7702 before making a decision which of the processors to buy for gaming.
AMD EPYC 9654P Processor Comparisons
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs Xeon E-2234
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs Xeon E5-2697R v4
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8260M
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs Xeon D-1602
• 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+
AMD EPYC 7702 Processor Comparisons
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 3990X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX
• Vs Ryzen 9 5950X
• Vs Ryzen 9 5900X
• Vs Ryzen 9 3950X
• Vs Ryzen 9 3900XT
• Vs Ryzen 9 3900X
• Vs Ryzen 7 5800X
• Vs Core i9-10900K
• Vs Ryzen 7 3800X
• Vs Core i9-10850K
• Vs Ryzen 7 3700X
• Vs Ryzen 5 5600X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 3970X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 7513
• 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 Xeon W-3275M
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs Core i9-12900K
• Vs Core i9-13900K
• Vs Core i9-12900H
• Vs Core i9-12900KF
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX
• Vs Core i9-12900HX
• Vs Core i9-12950HX
• Vs Core i9-12900KS
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX
• Vs Ryzen 9 7900X
• Vs Ryzen 7 7700X
• Vs Core i9-13900KF
• Vs Core i7-13700K
• Vs Core i7-13700KF
• Vs Core i5-13600K
• Vs Core i5-13600KF
• Vs Core i9-13900KS
• Vs Core i9-13900
• Vs Core i7-13700
• Vs Apple M1 Ultra
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• 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 7713P
• Vs EPYC 7H12
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 7313
• 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+
|
|
|
