 |
Intel Xeon Gold 5416S vs AMD EPYC 9274F |
|
Processor comparisons 27-04-2023
Perhaps you are thinking about choosing a processor, you will be able to make a choice by looking at the Intel Xeon Gold 5416S vs AMD EPYC 9274F tests and understand which is better for games or simple use for video editing, machine learning, rendering, programming, streaming. Here is all information from real video editing and streaming tests or many benchmarks. A step-by-step analysis of all the technical characteristics, so that it can be easier to read, is made by the table.
From the video comparison, you can get the results of parallel examination in software tests such as SuperPi, UserBenchmark, World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, Gears 5, MATLAB, Dolphin Emulator, Handbrake, PassMark, Prime95, Furmark, WPrime, AIDA64, 3DMark, RealBench, Blender, Cinebench 23 (20, 15), GeekBench 6, 5.2, PCMark 10, Blender, 7zip, VeraCrypt, DaVinci Resolve Studio.
Gaming performance of processors in: - Rainbow Six Siege
- Apex Legends
- Valorant
- Halo Infinite
- Fortnite
- Fallout 76
- Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and Warzone
- Overwatch
- Borderlands 3
- Death Stranding
- Watch Dogs Legion
- World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
- Cyberpunk 2077
- Assassin's Creed Valhalla
- Grand Theft Auto V
- DOOM: Eternal
- Last Man Standing
- Valheim
- Red Dead Redemption 2
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 9274F or Intel Xeon Gold 5416S.
Summary benchmark resultsAs a percentage of the maximum value based on a sample from the entire base of all processors
Processor Benchmark
| Xeon Gold 5416S | 64% |
EPYC 9274F | 69% |
This parameter shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, EPYC 9274F is 7% better than Xeon Gold 5416S. The data source is several popular tests. Detailed information can be found below.
Gaming performance
Summary result of all game benchmarks.| Xeon Gold 5416S | 66% |
EPYC 9274F | 73% |
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 play games. Because this processor costs 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: Control, DOTA 2A, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Metro Exodus, Microsoft Flight Simulator, NBA 2K20, Hitman 3, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), Half-Life: Alyx, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Monster Hunter World, Forza Horizon 4, Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, Ghostrunner, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO), League of Legends (LOL), Horizon Zero Dawn, Battlefield V.
Gaming benchmark| Fortnite | 116.9 | 129.7 | | Valorant | 132.8 | 147.4 | | Cyberpunk 2077 | 74.4 | 82.5 | | Apex Legends | 124.9 | 138.5 | | Call of Duty Warzone | 99.6 | 110.5 | | Overwatch | 107.6 | 119.4 | | Red Dead Redemption 2 | 91.7 | 101.7 | | DOOM Eternal | 66.4 | 73.7 | | Warzone | 103.6 | 114.9 | | Assassin's Creed | 111.6 | 123.8 | | Valheim | 110.2 | 122.3 |
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: 2K, FullHD or 4K. 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 compare it in one assembly with the video card that is installed in your computer.
Power consumption
| Xeon Gold 5416S | 26% |
EPYC 9274F | 21% |
To make a finishing choice 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 Gold 5416S is more energy efficient than the EPYC 9274F since it has less power consumption: 150W vs. 320W. Power consumption is particularly important for laptops. Also, when choosing a processor cooling system, you must 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 benchmarksIf you plan to use the processor not only for gaming, but also for streaming, video rendering or video editing, programming, machine learning, then the main parameter for you is its performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, to reach maximum performance, the processor uses all cores and threads that it has. You will learn this data from the benchmark tables below. Before using 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 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 Gold 5416S |
AMD EPYC 9274F | | Cinbench 15 Single-core | 1024 | 154 | | Cinbench 15 Multi-core | 3295 | 7827 | | Cinbench 20 Single-core | 2267 | 321 | | Cinbench 20 Multi-core | 8125 | 16627 | | Cinbench 23 Single-core | 1579 | 846 | | Cinbench 23 Multi-core | 46229 | 43295 |
Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | Intel Xeon Gold 5416S |
AMD EPYC 9274F | | Single-Core | 14358 | 1946 | | Multi-Core | 47058 | 63524 |
GeekBench 6, 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | Intel Xeon Gold 5416S |
AMD EPYC 9274F | | Single-Core | 1186 | 2073 | | Multi-Core | 28321 | 40852 |
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!
| Intel Xeon Gold 5416S |
AMD EPYC 9274F | | Announcement date | March 24, 2023 | November 10, 2022 | | Type | Server | Server | | Socket | FCLGA4677 | SP5 | | Core name | Sapphire Rapids | Genoa | | Architecture | x86 | Zen 4 | | Generation | 4 | 4 | | Turbo Frequency | 4 MHz | 4.3 MHz | | Frequency | 2 MHz | 4.05 MHz | | Cores | 16 | 24 | | Threads | 32 | 48 | | Bus rate | 16 GT/s | | | Bit | 64 | 64 | | Lithography | 7 nm | 5 nm | | Transistors count | 36000 millions | 64000 millions | | Power consumption (TDP) | 150 W | 320 W | | Memory type | Up to DDR5 4400 MT/s 1DPC and 2DPC | DDR5 | | Max. Memory | 4096 Gb | 4096 Gb | | Memory Frequency | | 4800 | | Memory bandwidth | | 460.8 GB/s | | L1 cache | | | | L2 cache | | | | L3 cache | 30 MB | 256MB | | Overclocking | No | No | | Supports ECC | Yes | Yes | | Part number | | 100-000000794
100-000000794WOF |
In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here EPYC 9274F is 50% better than Xeon Gold 5416S in terms of CPU frequency. Another difference is that EPYC 9274F has 8 more core than Xeon Gold 5416S. 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 Gold 5416S is better: 9
The number of parameters for which AMD EPYC 9274F is better: 24
However, it should be realized that the summary data that you have looked at here do not mean that taking them into account you should entirely trust a simple quantitative comparison. Better to watch the testing video and read the reviews of real owners of Intel Xeon Gold 5416S and AMD EPYC 9274F before deciding which of the CPUs to buy for gaming.
Intel Xeon Gold 5416S Processor Comparisons
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs EPYC 7542
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs EPYC 9174F
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs Xeon Gold 5415+
• Vs EPYC 7H12
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs Xeon Bronze 3408U
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs EPYC 7773X
• Vs Xeon E5-2697R v4
• Vs EPYC 7402
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs EPYC 9454
• Vs EPYC 7702
• Vs EPYC 9334
• Vs Xeon Gold 6434
• Vs EPYC 7532
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs Xeon D-1602
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs EPYC 7552
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8260M
• Vs EPYC 7702P
• Vs EPYC 9634
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs EPYC 7662
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs EPYC 9474F
• Vs Xeon Silver 4410Y
• Vs EPYC 7373X
• Vs EPYC 9454P
• Vs EPYC 7573X
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs EPYC 7352
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs EPYC 9534
• Vs EPYC 7252
• Vs EPYC 9124
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 9354
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs Xeon Gold 6434H
• Vs EPYC 9554
• Vs EPYC 7473X
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs EPYC 9374F
• Vs EPYC 9224
• Vs EPYC 9254
• Vs EPYC 9654
• Vs Xeon E-2234
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs EPYC 9554P
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs EPYC 7262
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8444H
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs EPYC 7232P
• Vs Xeon Silver 4410T
• Vs EPYC 7642
• Vs EPYC 9354P
• Vs Xeon Gold 6416H
• Vs Xeon Silver 4416+
AMD EPYC 9274F Processor Comparisons
• Vs EPYC 9254
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs EPYC 9634
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs EPYC 9554P
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs Xeon E5-2697R v4
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs Xeon D-1602
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs EPYC 9654
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs EPYC 9534
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8260M
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs Xeon E-2234
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs EPYC 9224
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs EPYC 9124
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs EPYC 7702
• Vs EPYC 9554
• Vs EPYC 9174F
• 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 6416H
• Vs Xeon Silver 4416+
|
|
|
