 |
Intel Xeon Gold 6416H vs AMD EPYC 9274F |
|
Processor comparisons 15-05-2023
Let's say you can't decide which CPU to buy, you can make a decision by looking at the Intel Xeon Gold 6416H vs AMD EPYC 9274F tests and decide which is better for games or simple use for video editing, machine learning, programming, rendering, streaming. Here is all information from several benchmarks or real video editing and streaming tests. A careful review of all the technical characteristics, so that it can be easier to read, is presented in the form of the table.
From the video comparison, you can get the results of joint testing in software tests like WPrime, 3DMark, 7zip, DaVinci Resolve Studio, VeraCrypt, SuperPi, UserBenchmark, PassMark, PCMark 10, Gears 5, Handbrake, GeekBench 6, 5.2, Blender, AIDA64, Furmark, Dolphin Emulator, Blender, Prime95, RealBench, MATLAB, World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, Cinebench 23 (20, 15).
And how good the processors are in games: - Valorant
- Grand Theft Auto V
- Halo Infinite
- Apex Legends
- Valheim
- Overwatch
- Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and Warzone
- Fallout 76
- World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
- Red Dead Redemption 2
- Watch Dogs Legion
- Last Man Standing
- Assassin's Creed Valhalla
- Fortnite
- Death Stranding
- Rainbow Six Siege
- Borderlands 3
- DOOM: Eternal
- Cyberpunk 2077
After looking at the data of parallel benchmarks and videos, you already be able to know which CPU is better to buy for gaming AMD EPYC 9274F 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 9274F | 69% |
This shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, EPYC 9274F is 4% better than Xeon Gold 6416H. 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 9274F | 73% |
For the maximum in this test, the results of the most powerful processor in the site database are taken. 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. And if it seems to you that the selected CPU has a low game result, just look at the FPS that it produces in real games in the summary table below.
List of less popular games in which processors were compared: League of Legends (LOL), Hitman 3, Forza Horizon 4, Microsoft Flight Simulator, Control, DOTA 2A, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), Monster Hunter World, Horizon Zero Dawn, Half-Life: Alyx, Metro Exodus, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO), Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Battlefield V, Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, Ghostrunner, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, NBA 2K20.
Gaming benchmark| Fortnite | 120.9 | 129.7 | | Valorant | 137.4 | 147.4 | | Cyberpunk 2077 | 77.0 | 82.5 | | Apex Legends | 129.2 | 138.5 | | Call of Duty Warzone | 103.1 | 110.5 | | Overwatch | 111.3 | 119.4 | | Red Dead Redemption 2 | 94.8 | 101.7 | | DOOM Eternal | 68.7 | 73.7 | | Warzone | 107.2 | 114.9 | | Assassin's Creed | 115.4 | 123.8 | | Valheim | 114.1 | 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. 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 Gold 6416H | 27% |
EPYC 9274F | 21% |
To make a final 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 6416H is more energy efficient than the EPYC 9274F as it consumes less power: 165W vs. 320W. Power consumption is particularly important for laptops. Also, when choosing a processor cooling system, you must 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 benchmarksFor example you want 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, the CPU uses all threads and cores that it has to the maximum to reach maximum performance. You will find out this data from the benchmark tables below. Before you take into account the data from these tests, be sure to check whether the program you are going to use on your computer supports multi-threaded mode. Because 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 9274F | | Cinbench 15 Single-core | 1169 | 154 | | Cinbench 15 Multi-core | 3758 | 7827 | | Cinbench 20 Single-core | 2586 | 321 | | Cinbench 20 Multi-core | 9265 | 16627 | | Cinbench 23 Single-core | 1802 | 846 | | Cinbench 23 Multi-core | 52703 | 43295 |
Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | Intel Xeon Gold 6416H |
AMD EPYC 9274F | | Single-Core | 16370 | 1946 | | Multi-Core | 53648 | 63524 |
GeekBench 6, 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | Intel Xeon Gold 6416H |
AMD EPYC 9274F | | Single-Core | 1354 | 2073 | | Multi-Core | 32288 | 40852 |
Comparison of specifications
In the specification comparison table, the processor release date and overclocking capability will be the most helpful. The later the processor is released, the longer it will last in your computer. And the easier it will be to upgrade the system in the future. The same can be said about overclocking. If the processor can be overclocked, thereby increasing its performance, then it will continue to maintain maximum FPS in new games. The economy are obvious! It turns out that there is no longer a need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer.
| Intel Xeon Gold 6416H |
AMD EPYC 9274F | | Announcement date | March 17, 2023 | November 10, 2022 | | Type | Server | Server | | Socket | FCLGA4677 | SP5 | | Core name | Sapphire Rapids | Genoa | | Architecture | x86 | Zen 4 | | Generation | 4 | 4 | | Turbo Frequency | 4.2 MHz | 4.3 MHz | | Frequency | 2.2 MHz | 4.05 MHz | | Cores | 18 | 24 | | Threads | 36 | 48 | | Bus rate | 16 GT/s | | | Bit | 64 | 64 | | Lithography | 7 nm | 5 nm | | Transistors count | 36000 millions | 64000 millions | | Power consumption (TDP) | 165 W | 320 W | | Memory type | Up to DDR5 4800 MT/s 1DPC Up to DDR5 4400 MT/s 2DPC | DDR5 | | Max. Memory | 4 Gb | 4096 Gb | | Memory Frequency | | 4800 | | Memory bandwidth | | 460.8 GB/s | | L1 cache | | | | L2 cache | | | | L3 cache | 45 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 45% better than Xeon Gold 6416H in terms of CPU frequency. Another difference is that EPYC 9274F 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: 9
The number of parameters for which AMD EPYC 9274F is better: 25
Although it should be understood that all the data in the text above do not mean that taking them into account you should fully trust a simple comparison of these numbers. Better to watch the testing video and read the reviews of real owners of Intel Xeon Gold 6416H and AMD EPYC 9274F before making a choice which processor 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 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 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 5416S
• Vs Xeon Silver 4416+
|
|
|
