 |
Intel Xeon Gold 6416H vs AMD EPYC 7252 |
|
Processor comparisons 15-05-2023
Let's say you are thinking about choosing a processor, you will be able to make a decision after reading the detailed tests Intel Xeon Gold 6416H vs AMD EPYC 7252 and see which is better for games or simple use for streaming, programming, machine learning, video editing, rendering. Here is useful information from various benchmarks or real video editing and streaming tests. A careful analysis of all the technical characteristics, to make it easier to understand, is presented in the form of the table.
From the video comparison, you can get the results of joint testing in software tests like PCMark 10, SuperPi, 3DMark, AIDA64, UserBenchmark, RealBench, Dolphin Emulator, PassMark, DaVinci Resolve Studio, VeraCrypt, Blender, Cinebench 23 (20, 15), Gears 5, Blender, MATLAB, World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, GeekBench 6, 5.2, Furmark, Handbrake, 7zip, WPrime, Prime95.
And how good the processors are in games: - Valheim
- Death Stranding
- Overwatch
- Last Man Standing
- World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
- Borderlands 3
- Fallout 76
- Valorant
- Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and Warzone
- Fortnite
- Cyberpunk 2077
- Red Dead Redemption 2
- Rainbow Six Siege
- Watch Dogs Legion
- DOOM: Eternal
- Assassin's Creed Valhalla
- Halo Infinite
- Apex Legends
- Grand Theft Auto V
After reading the results these benchmarks and videos, you can already make an informed decision about which processor is better to buy for gaming AMD EPYC 7252 or Intel Xeon Gold 6416H.
Summary benchmark resultsAs a percentage of the maximum value based on a sample from the entire base of all processors
Processor Benchmark
| Xeon Gold 6416H | 66% |
EPYC 7252 | 55% |
This shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, Xeon Gold 6416H is 16% better than EPYC 7252. The data source is several popular tests. Detailed information can be found below.
Gaming performance
Summary result of all game benchmarks.| Xeon Gold 6416H | 68% |
EPYC 7252 | 58% |
The maximum result in this parameter is 100 percent, which is the performance of the most powerful processor at the moment. And of course, this is a server processor, on which no one will run games. Because this processor costs several tens of thousands of dollars. Therefore, if you think that the selected CPU has a low game result, look at the FPS that it produces in real games in the final table below.
List of other games in which processors were compared: Monster Hunter World, Ghostrunner, Hitman 3, Forza Horizon 4, Half-Life: Alyx, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, League of Legends (LOL), Battlefield V, Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), DOTA 2A, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO), Horizon Zero Dawn, Microsoft Flight Simulator, Metro Exodus, Control, NBA 2K20.
Gaming benchmark| Fortnite | 120.9 | 103.4 | | Valorant | 137.4 | 117.5 | | Cyberpunk 2077 | 77.0 | 65.8 | | Apex Legends | 129.2 | 110.4 | | Call of Duty Warzone | 103.1 | 88.1 | | Overwatch | 111.3 | 95.1 | | Red Dead Redemption 2 | 94.8 | 81.0 | | DOOM Eternal | 68.7 | 58.7 | | Warzone | 107.2 | 91.6 | | Assassin's Creed | 115.4 | 98.7 | | Valheim | 114.1 | 97.5 |
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 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
| Xeon Gold 6416H | 27% |
EPYC 7252 | 27% |
Software benchmarksLet's say you plan to use the processor not only for gaming, but also for video rendering or video editing, machine learning, streaming, programming, then first of all you need to pay attention to the performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, the processor turns on all cores and threads that it has to the maximum to achieve maximum performance. You will find out 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. Since there are still many programs that can 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 | Intel Xeon Gold 6416H |
AMD EPYC 7252 | | Cinbench 15 Single-core | 1169 | 242 | | Cinbench 15 Multi-core | 3758 | 1856 | | Cinbench 20 Single-core | 2586 | 433 | | Cinbench 20 Multi-core | 9265 | 4126 | | Cinbench 23 Single-core | 1802 | 1482 | | Cinbench 23 Multi-core | 52703 | 11071 |
Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | Intel Xeon Gold 6416H |
AMD EPYC 7252 | | Single-Core | 16370 | 1615 | | Multi-Core | 53648 | 19724 |
GeekBench 6, 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | Intel Xeon Gold 6416H |
AMD EPYC 7252 | | Single-Core | 1354 | 1001 | | Multi-Core | 32288 | 15066 |
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 newer the processor, the longer it will last you. And the easier it will be to upgrade the system in the future. The same can be said about overclocking. When the processor can be overclocked, increasing its performance, then it will still be able to produce maximum FPS in the newest games. The economy are obvious! Accordingly, there is no longer a need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer.
| Intel Xeon Gold 6416H |
AMD EPYC 7252 | | Announcement date | March 17, 2023 | April 01, 2020 | | Type | Server | Server | | Socket | FCLGA4677 | SP3 | | Core name | Sapphire Rapids | Rome | | Architecture | x86 | Zen 2 | | Generation | 4 | 2 | | Turbo Frequency | 4.2 MHz | 3.2 MHz | | Frequency | 2.2 MHz | 3.1 MHz | | Cores | 18 | 8 | | Threads | 36 | 16 | | Bus rate | 16 GT/s | | | Bit | 64 | 64 | | Lithography | 7 nm | 7 nm | | Transistors count | 36000 millions | 42000 millions | | Power consumption (TDP) | 165 W | 120 W | | Memory type | Up to DDR5 4800 MT/s 1DPC Up to DDR5 4400 MT/s 2DPC | DDR4 | | Max. Memory | 4 Gb | | | Memory Frequency | | 3200 | | Memory bandwidth | | 85 GByte/s | | L1 cache | | | | L2 cache | | | | L3 cache | 45 MB | 64MB | | Overclocking | No | No | | Supports ECC | Yes | Yes | | Part number | | 100-000000080
100-100000080WOF |
In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here EPYC 7252 is 29% better than Xeon Gold 6416H in terms of CPU frequency. Another difference is that Xeon Gold 6416H has 10 more core than EPYC 7252. 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 6416H is better: 28
The number of parameters for which AMD EPYC 7252 is better: 6
However, it should be understood that all the number 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 Intel Xeon Gold 6416H and AMD EPYC 7252 before deciding which CPU to buy for gaming and which not.
Intel Xeon Gold 6416H Processor Comparisons
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8260M
• Vs EPYC 9554P
• Vs Xeon Gold 5415+
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs EPYC 9224
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs EPYC 7H12
• Vs EPYC 7352
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8444H
• Vs EPYC 7262
• Vs EPYC 7573X
• Vs Xeon Bronze 3408U
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs EPYC 9454
• Vs EPYC 9254
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs EPYC 9654
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs Xeon Silver 4410Y
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs Xeon Gold 6434
• Vs EPYC 7542
• Vs EPYC 9454P
• Vs Xeon E5-2697R v4
• Vs EPYC 7662
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 7473X
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs EPYC 9124
• Vs Xeon E-2234
• Vs EPYC 7552
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs EPYC 7702
• Vs EPYC 7642
• Vs Xeon Gold 5416S
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs EPYC 9374F
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 7402
• Vs EPYC 9474F
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs EPYC 7532
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs EPYC 9534
• Vs Xeon Gold 6434H
• Vs EPYC 9274F
• Vs EPYC 9334
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs EPYC 9354P
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs EPYC 7232P
• Vs EPYC 9554
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs EPYC 9354
• Vs EPYC 7702P
• Vs Xeon D-1602
• Vs EPYC 9634
• Vs EPYC 7373X
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs EPYC 7773X
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs EPYC 9174F
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs Xeon Silver 4410T
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs Xeon Silver 4416+
AMD EPYC 7252 Processor Comparisons
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs EPYC 9334
• Vs Xeon E-2234
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs EPYC 9474F
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs EPYC 9254
• Vs EPYC 9124
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs EPYC 9554P
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs Xeon E5-2697R v4
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 9634
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs EPYC 7402
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs EPYC 7702
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs EPYC 9554
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 9374F
• Vs EPYC 9454
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs EPYC 9534
• Vs Xeon D-1602
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs EPYC 9274F
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs EPYC 9454P
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs EPYC 9354
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs EPYC 9654
• Vs EPYC 9354P
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs EPYC 9174F
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8260M
• Vs EPYC 9224
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs EPYC 7232P
• 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 Silver 4416+
|
|
|
