 |
Intel Xeon Gold 6434 vs AMD EPYC 9354 |
|
Processor comparisons 29-03-2023
For example you are thinking about choosing a processor, you will be able to make a choice by looking at the Intel Xeon Gold 6434 vs AMD EPYC 9354 tests and understand which is better for games or normal use for rendering, streaming, machine learning, video editing, programming. Here is all information from real video editing and streaming tests or different benchmarks. A careful review of all the specifications, so that it can be easier to read, is made by the table.
From the comparison video, you can get the results of joint testing in software tests such as AIDA64, Gears 5, Blender, GeekBench 6, 5.2, SuperPi, WPrime, 3DMark, Prime95, Blender, VeraCrypt, RealBench, UserBenchmark, DaVinci Resolve Studio, World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, Cinebench 23 (20, 15), 7zip, Handbrake, PassMark, Dolphin Emulator, Furmark, PCMark 10, MATLAB.
Gaming performance of processors in: - DOOM: Eternal
- Halo Infinite
- Valorant
- Red Dead Redemption 2
- Rainbow Six Siege
- Overwatch
- Borderlands 3
- Fallout 76
- Grand Theft Auto V
- World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
- Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and Warzone
- Fortnite
- Apex Legends
- Death Stranding
- Valheim
- Watch Dogs Legion
- Assassin's Creed Valhalla
- Last Man Standing
- Cyberpunk 2077
After looking at the data of joint benchmarks and videos, you can already make an informed decision about which processor is better to buy for gaming AMD EPYC 9354 or Intel Xeon Gold 6434.
Summary benchmark resultsAs a percentage of the maximum value based on a sample from the entire base of all processors
Processor Benchmark
| Xeon Gold 6434 | 62% |
EPYC 9354 | 70% |
This parameter shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, EPYC 9354 is 11% better than Xeon Gold 6434. 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 6434 | 64% |
EPYC 9354 | 75% |
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 the cost of this processor reaches 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 final table below.
List of less popular games in which processors were compared: Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, Forza Horizon 4, Metro Exodus, Horizon Zero Dawn, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), League of Legends (LOL), Ghostrunner, Half-Life: Alyx, Battlefield V, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Hitman 3, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO), Monster Hunter World, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Control, NBA 2K20, DOTA 2A, Microsoft Flight Simulator.
Gaming benchmark| Fortnite | 112.8 | 133.0 | | Valorant | 128.2 | 151.1 | | Cyberpunk 2077 | 71.8 | 84.6 | | Apex Legends | 120.5 | 142.1 | | Call of Duty Warzone | 96.1 | 113.4 | | Overwatch | 103.8 | 122.4 | | Red Dead Redemption 2 | 88.5 | 104.3 | | DOOM Eternal | 64.1 | 75.6 | | Warzone | 100.0 | 117.9 | | Assassin's Creed | 107.7 | 127.0 | | Valheim | 106.4 | 125.4 |
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 tested computers not only did they have different video cards and different amounts of RAM. 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 6434 | 27% |
EPYC 9354 | 26% |
To make a final decision 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 6434 is more energy efficient than the EPYC 9354 since it has less power consumption: 195W vs. 280W. Power consumption is especially important for laptops. Also, when choosing a processor cooling system, you need to 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 benchmarksFor example you want to use the processor not only for gaming, but also for streaming, video editing or video rendering, machine learning, programming, then first of all you need to pay attention to the performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, to reach maximum performance, the CPU includes all threads and cores that it has. You will find out 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 advantages 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 6434 |
AMD EPYC 9354 | | Cinbench 15 Single-core | 885 | 165 | | Cinbench 15 Multi-core | 2858 | 8452 | | Cinbench 20 Single-core | 1964 | 346 | | Cinbench 20 Multi-core | 7051 | 17956 | | Cinbench 23 Single-core | 1368 | 913 | | Cinbench 23 Multi-core | 40142 | 46758 |
Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | Intel Xeon Gold 6434 |
AMD EPYC 9354 | | Single-Core | 12464 | 2101 | | Multi-Core | 40862 | 68605 |
GeekBench 6, 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | Intel Xeon Gold 6434 |
AMD EPYC 9354 | | Single-Core | 1607 | 2238 | | Multi-Core | 24327 | 44119 |
Comparison of specifications
In the specification comparison table, the most helpful will be the release date of the processor and the possibility of overclocking it. 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 can be said about overclocking. If the processor can be overclocked, increasing its performance, then it will still be able to produce maximum FPS even in the newest games. Accordingly, you do not need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer. The economy are obvious!
| Intel Xeon Gold 6434 |
AMD EPYC 9354 | | Announcement date | March 12, 2023 | November 10, 2022 | | Type | Server | Server | | Socket | FCLGA4677 | SP5 | | Core name | Sapphire Rapids | Genoa | | Architecture | x86 | Zen 4 | | Generation | 4 | 4 | | Turbo Frequency | 4.1 MHz | 3.8 MHz | | Frequency | 3.7 MHz | 3.25 MHz | | Cores | 8 | 32 | | Threads | 16 | 64 | | Bus rate | 16 GT/s | | | Bit | 64 | 64 | | Lithography | 7 nm | 5 nm | | Transistors count | 36000 millions | 64000 millions | | Power consumption (TDP) | 195 W | 280 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 | 22.5 MB | 256MB | | Overclocking | No | No | | Supports ECC | Yes | Yes | | Part number | | 100-000000798
100-100000798WOF |
In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here Xeon Gold 6434 is 12% better than EPYC 9354 in terms of CPU frequency. Another difference is that EPYC 9354 has 24 more core than Xeon Gold 6434. 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 6434 is better: 9
The number of parameters for which AMD EPYC 9354 is better: 25
However, it should be realized that all the number in the text above do not mean that taking them into account you should completely trust a simple comparison of these figures. Better to watch the video tests and read the opinion of of people who bought Intel Xeon Gold 6434 and AMD EPYC 9354 before making a decision which of the processors to buy for gaming.
Intel Xeon Gold 6434 Processor Comparisons
• Vs EPYC 7662
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs EPYC 9554
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs EPYC 7H12
• Vs EPYC 9534
• Vs EPYC 7252
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs EPYC 9374F
• Vs Xeon Gold 5415+
• Vs EPYC 9124
• Vs EPYC 7532
• Vs EPYC 7232P
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs EPYC 9474F
• Vs EPYC 9274F
• Vs EPYC 7402
• Vs EPYC 7702P
• Vs EPYC 9634
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs EPYC 9554P
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs Xeon E-2234
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs EPYC 9354P
• Vs EPYC 9334
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs EPYC 7262
• Vs EPYC 7702
• Vs EPYC 9254
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs EPYC 7552
• Vs EPYC 7373X
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs EPYC 9174F
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs EPYC 7642
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs EPYC 9654
• Vs EPYC 9454
• Vs EPYC 7352
• Vs EPYC 9454P
• Vs Xeon E5-2697R v4
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs Xeon D-1602
• Vs EPYC 7542
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8260M
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs EPYC 9224
• Vs EPYC 7502
• 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 Gold 6416H
• Vs Xeon Silver 4416+
AMD EPYC 9354 Processor Comparisons
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs EPYC 9124
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs EPYC 9174F
• Vs EPYC 9534
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• Vs EPYC 9554
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs EPYC 9224
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs EPYC 9654
• Vs EPYC 9274F
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs EPYC 7702
• Vs Xeon D-1602
• Vs Xeon E5-2697R v4
• Vs EPYC 9554P
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs EPYC 9334
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs Xeon E-2234
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 9634
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8260M
• Vs EPYC 9254
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• 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 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 Gold 6416H
• Vs Xeon Silver 4416+
|
|
|
