 |
Intel Xeon Bronze 3408U vs AMD EPYC 7662 |
|
Processor comparisons 29-03-2023
For example you can't decide which processor to buy, you can make a choice by looking at the Intel Xeon Bronze 3408U vs AMD EPYC 7662 tests and understand which is better for games or normal use for video editing, streaming, rendering, machine learning, programming. Here you can find all information from several benchmarks or real video editing and streaming tests. A careful analysis of all the specifications, so that it can be easier to understand, is made by the table.
From the comparison video, you can get the results of joint testing in special testing software like Blender, RealBench, Blender, 7zip, Furmark, MATLAB, SuperPi, VeraCrypt, 3DMark, PCMark 10, DaVinci Resolve Studio, Handbrake, GeekBench 6, 5.2, Prime95, Dolphin Emulator, Cinebench 23 (20, 15), AIDA64, World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, PassMark, UserBenchmark, WPrime, Gears 5.
And how good the CPUs are in games: - Borderlands 3
- Call of Duty: Warzone and Modern Warfare
- Valorant
- Cyberpunk 2077
- Last Man Standing
- Overwatch
- Grand Theft Auto V
- Fortnite
- Valheim
- World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
- Halo Infinite
- Watch Dogs Legion
- DOOM: Eternal
- Assassin's Creed Valhalla
- Rainbow Six Siege
- Death Stranding
- Apex Legends
- Red Dead Redemption 2
- Fallout 76
After reading the results of joint benchmarks and videos, you already be able to figure out which CPU is better to buy for gaming AMD EPYC 7662 or Intel Xeon Bronze 3408U.
Summary benchmark resultsAs a percentage of the maximum value based on a sample from the entire base of all processors
Processor Benchmark
| Xeon Bronze 3408U | 52% |
EPYC 7662 | 72% |
This parameter shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, EPYC 7662 is 27% better than Xeon Bronze 3408U. The data source is several popular tests. More detailed information of the benchmarks is below.
Gaming performance
Summary result of all game benchmarks.| Xeon Bronze 3408U | 54% |
EPYC 7662 | 84% |
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 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 final table below.
List of less popular games in which processors were compared: Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, Half-Life: Alyx, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO), NBA 2K20, Ghostrunner, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Forza Horizon 4, Microsoft Flight Simulator, Hitman 3, Metro Exodus, League of Legends (LOL), Monster Hunter World, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), Horizon Zero Dawn, DOTA 2A, Battlefield V, Control.
Gaming benchmark| Fortnite | 96.0 | 149.3 | | Valorant | 109.1 | 169.6 | | Cyberpunk 2077 | 61.1 | 95.0 | | Apex Legends | 102.6 | 159.5 | | Call of Duty Warzone | 81.8 | 127.2 | | Overwatch | 88.4 | 137.4 | | Red Dead Redemption 2 | 75.3 | 117.1 | | DOOM Eternal | 54.6 | 84.8 | | Warzone | 85.1 | 132.3 | | Assassin's Creed | 91.6 | 142.5 | | Valheim | 90.6 | 140.8 |
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 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: 4K, 2K or FullHD. So 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
| Xeon Bronze 3408U | 20% |
EPYC 7662 | 16% |
To make a finishing resolution on which processor is better, you should also consider the generation of its core. It is clear that the newer the generation, the better the performance of the processor in games and benchmarks, as well as its energy efficiency. In this case the Xeon Bronze 3408U is more energy efficient than the EPYC 7662 since it has less power consumption: 125W vs. 225W. Power consumption is especially important for laptops. And TDP should be taken into account when choosing a processor cooling system. You need to buy a cooler that has the TDP data specified in the specification was greater than the TDP of the compared processor.
Software benchmarksFor example you plan to use the processor not only for gaming, but also for programming, video editing or video rendering, machine learning, streaming, then the main parameter for you is its performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, to reach maximum efficiency, the processor uses 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 find out whether 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 turns out to be unnecessary.
Cinebench 23, 20 an 15
The results of this benchmark show Single-threaded and Multi-threaded CPU performance | Intel Xeon Bronze 3408U |
AMD EPYC 7662 | | Cinbench 15 Single-core | 161 | 204 | | Cinbench 15 Multi-core | 759 | 9116 | | Cinbench 20 Single-core | 388 | 523 | | Cinbench 20 Multi-core | 1693 | 19338 | | Cinbench 23 Single-core | 957 | 1006 | | Cinbench 23 Multi-core | 4251 | 50318 |
Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | Intel Xeon Bronze 3408U |
AMD EPYC 7662 | | Single-Core | 122 | 2880 | | Multi-Core | 8325 | 73932 |
GeekBench 6, 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | Intel Xeon Bronze 3408U |
AMD EPYC 7662 | | Single-Core | 786 | 1093 | | Multi-Core | 7851 | 60084 |
Comparison of specifications
In the specification comparison table, the most useful will be the the possibility of overclocking it and release date of the processor. 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 still be able to produce maximum FPS even in new games. It turns out that there is no longer a need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer. The savings are obvious!
| Intel Xeon Bronze 3408U |
AMD EPYC 7662 | | Announcement date | March 23, 2023 | October 01, 2020 | | Type | Server | Server | | Socket | FCLGA4677 | SP3 | | Core name | Sapphire Rapids | Rome | | Architecture | x86 | Zen 2 | | Generation | 4 | 2 | | Turbo Frequency | 1.9 MHz | 3.3 MHz | | Frequency | 1.8 MHz | 2 MHz | | Cores | 8 | 64 | | Threads | 8 | 128 | | Bus rate | 16 GT/s | | | Bit | 64 | 64 | | Lithography | 7 nm | 7 nm | | Transistors count | 36000 millions | 64000 millions | | Power consumption (TDP) | 125 W | 225 W | | Memory type | Up to DDR5 4000 MT/s 1DPC and 2DPC | DDR4 | | Max. Memory | 4096 Gb | | | Memory Frequency | | 3200 | | Memory bandwidth | | 208 GByte/s | | L1 cache | | | | L2 cache | | | | L3 cache | 22.5 MB | 256MB | | Overclocking | No | No | | Supports ECC | Yes | No | | Part number | | 100-000000137
100-000000137WOF |
In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here EPYC 7662 is 9% better than Xeon Bronze 3408U in terms of CPU frequency. Another difference is that EPYC 7662 has 56 more core than Xeon Bronze 3408U. Also keep in mind that high CPU frequency affects battery life through power consumption (relevant for laptops).
Result:
The number of parameters for which Intel Xeon Bronze 3408U is better: 6
The number of parameters for which AMD EPYC 7662 is better: 29
However, it should be understood that all the figures in the table above do not mean that taking them into account you should fully trust a simple comparison of these figures. Better to watch the video tests and read the opinion of of people who bought Intel Xeon Bronze 3408U and AMD EPYC 7662 before making a selection which of the CPUs to buy for gaming.
Intel Xeon Bronze 3408U Processor Comparisons
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs EPYC 7352
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8260M
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs EPYC 7552
• Vs EPYC 9224
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs EPYC 9274F
• Vs EPYC 9354
• Vs EPYC 7642
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs EPYC 9174F
• Vs EPYC 7473X
• Vs EPYC 7402
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs EPYC 9454
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs Xeon Gold 6434H
• Vs EPYC 7573X
• Vs EPYC 9474F
• Vs EPYC 7252
• Vs EPYC 7262
• Vs EPYC 7H12
• Vs EPYC 7532
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs EPYC 9554P
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs EPYC 9374F
• Vs EPYC 9354P
• Vs Xeon E5-2697R v4
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs EPYC 9334
• Vs EPYC 7702P
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• Vs EPYC 9254
• Vs EPYC 9654
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs EPYC 9454P
• Vs Xeon D-1602
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs EPYC 9534
• Vs Xeon Gold 5415+
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs EPYC 9634
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs EPYC 7542
• Vs EPYC 9554
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs Xeon E-2234
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs Xeon Gold 6434
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs EPYC 7702
• Vs EPYC 7232P
• Vs EPYC 9124
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs EPYC 7373X
• 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 7662 Processor Comparisons
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs EPYC 9454
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs Xeon E-2234
• Vs Xeon D-1602
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs EPYC 9634
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 7532
• Vs EPYC 7552
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs EPYC 9354
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs EPYC 7262
• Vs EPYC 7642
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs EPYC 9474F
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• Vs EPYC 9554P
• Vs EPYC 7252
• Vs EPYC 9454P
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs EPYC 9554
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs EPYC 9374F
• Vs EPYC 9174F
• Vs Xeon E5-2697R v4
• Vs EPYC 9224
• Vs EPYC 7232P
• Vs EPYC 7702
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs EPYC 9274F
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs EPYC 7542
• Vs EPYC 9654
• Vs EPYC 9354P
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8260M
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs EPYC 9334
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs EPYC 9254
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 7402
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs EPYC 9124
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs EPYC 7352
• Vs EPYC 9534
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• 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 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+
|
|
|
