 |
Intel Xeon Gold 6416H vs AMD EPYC 7352 |
|
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 7352 and understand which is better for games or simple use for programming, machine learning, rendering, video editing, streaming. Here is all information from real streaming and video editing tests or various benchmarks. A careful analysis of all the technical characteristics, to make it easier to understand, is made by the table.
From the comparison video, you can get the results of parallel examination in special test applications like UserBenchmark, DaVinci Resolve Studio, World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, Gears 5, 7zip, RealBench, PassMark, Handbrake, WPrime, Dolphin Emulator, SuperPi, AIDA64, MATLAB, Furmark, Blender, GeekBench 6, 5.2, VeraCrypt, Prime95, PCMark 10, 3DMark, Blender, Cinebench 23 (20, 15).
And how good the processors are in games: - Watch Dogs Legion
- Borderlands 3
- World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
- Assassin's Creed Valhalla
- Rainbow Six Siege
- Halo Infinite
- Cyberpunk 2077
- Last Man Standing
- Valorant
- Apex Legends
- DOOM: Eternal
- Valheim
- Death Stranding
- Grand Theft Auto V
- Fortnite
- Red Dead Redemption 2
- Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and Warzone
- Fallout 76
- Overwatch
After reading the results of all benchmarks and videos, you can already make an informed decision about which CPU is better to buy for gaming AMD EPYC 7352 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 7352 | 62% |
The number of this parameter shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, Xeon Gold 6416H is 6% better than EPYC 7352. The data source is several popular tests. More detailed information of the benchmarks is below.
Gaming performance
Summary result of all game benchmarks.| Xeon Gold 6416H | 68% |
EPYC 7352 | 59% |
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. 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 less popular games in which processors were compared: Monster Hunter World, Half-Life: Alyx, League of Legends (LOL), Battlefield V, NBA 2K20, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO), Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Hitman 3, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), Horizon Zero Dawn, Forza Horizon 4, Microsoft Flight Simulator, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Control, Ghostrunner, Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, DOTA 2A, Metro Exodus.
Gaming benchmark| Fortnite | 120.9 | 104.6 | | Valorant | 137.4 | 118.9 | | Cyberpunk 2077 | 77.0 | 66.6 | | Apex Legends | 129.2 | 111.7 | | Call of Duty Warzone | 103.1 | 89.2 | | Overwatch | 111.3 | 96.3 | | Red Dead Redemption 2 | 94.8 | 82.0 | | DOOM Eternal | 68.7 | 59.4 | | Warzone | 107.2 | 92.7 | | Assassin's Creed | 115.4 | 99.9 | | Valheim | 114.1 | 98.7 |
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 amounts of RAM and different video cards. But users also tested them at different screen resolutions: 2K, FullHD or 4K. 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
| Xeon Gold 6416H | 27% |
EPYC 7352 | 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 Gold 6416H is more energy efficient than the EPYC 7352 as it consumes less power: 165W vs. 155W. Power consumption is especially important for laptops. Also, when choosing a processor cooling system, you need to know its TDP. 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 benchmarksIf you want to use the processor not only for gaming, but also for video editing or video rendering, streaming, machine learning, programming, then the main parameter for you is its performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, to reach maximum performance, the CPU includes 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 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 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 | Intel Xeon Gold 6416H |
AMD EPYC 7352 | | Cinbench 15 Single-core | 1169 | 113 | | Cinbench 15 Multi-core | 3758 | 5016 | | Cinbench 20 Single-core | 2586 | 388 | | Cinbench 20 Multi-core | 9265 | 10641 | | Cinbench 23 Single-core | 1802 | 554 | | Cinbench 23 Multi-core | 52703 | 27682 |
Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | Intel Xeon Gold 6416H |
AMD EPYC 7352 | | Single-Core | 16370 | 1805 | | Multi-Core | 53648 | 40609 |
GeekBench 6, 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | Intel Xeon Gold 6416H |
AMD EPYC 7352 | | Single-Core | 1354 | 962 | | Multi-Core | 32288 | 16287 |
Comparison of specifications
In the specification comparison table, the most useful will be the release date of the processor and the possibility of overclocking it. The newer the processor, 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 in new games. Accordingly, you do not need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer. The savings are obvious!
| Intel Xeon Gold 6416H |
AMD EPYC 7352 | | Announcement date | March 17, 2023 | October 01, 2019 | | 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 | 2.3 MHz | | Cores | 18 | 24 | | Threads | 36 | 48 | | Bus rate | 16 GT/s | | | Bit | 64 | 64 | | Lithography | 7 nm | 7 nm | | Transistors count | 36000 millions | 56000 millions | | Power consumption (TDP) | 165 W | 155 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 | | 204 GByte/s | | L1 cache | | | | L2 cache | | | | L3 cache | 45 MB | 128MB | | Overclocking | No | No | | Supports ECC | Yes | No | | Part number | | 100-000000077
100-100000077WOF |
In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here EPYC 7352 is 4% better than Xeon Gold 6416H in terms of CPU frequency. Another difference is that EPYC 7352 has 6 more core than Xeon Gold 6416H. 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: 26
The number of parameters for which AMD EPYC 7352 is better: 9
Although it should be understood that all the data in the text above do not mean that you should be guided entirely by them and trust a simple quantitative comparison. Better to watch the video tests and read the opinion of real owners of Intel Xeon Gold 6416H and AMD EPYC 7352 before making a choice which of the processors to buy for gaming.
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 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 7252
• 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 7352 Processor Comparisons
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs EPYC 9354P
• Vs EPYC 9124
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs EPYC 9334
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs EPYC 9634
• Vs EPYC 7252
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs Xeon E-2234
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs EPYC 9274F
• Vs EPYC 9454
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs EPYC 9534
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs EPYC 7702
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs EPYC 9474F
• Vs EPYC 9224
• Vs EPYC 9174F
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• Vs Xeon D-1602
• Vs EPYC 9254
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs EPYC 9654
• Vs EPYC 7262
• Vs EPYC 9554P
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs Xeon E5-2697R v4
• Vs EPYC 7402
• Vs EPYC 9554
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs EPYC 9374F
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs EPYC 9354
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs EPYC 9454P
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs EPYC 7232P
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8260M
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• 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+
|
|
|
