 |
Intel Xeon Gold 6434 vs Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M |
|
Processor comparisons 29-03-2023
Perhaps you can't decide which CPU to buy, you can make a choice by looking at the Intel Xeon Gold 6434 vs Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M tests and understand which is better for games or normal use for rendering, video editing, streaming, programming, machine learning. Here you can find useful information from many benchmarks or real video editing and streaming tests. A step-by-step analysis of all the technical characteristics, so that it can be easier to read, is presented in the form of the table.
From the comparison video, you can get the results of parallel examination in special testing software like Blender, Gears 5, Furmark, Handbrake, VeraCrypt, World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, 7zip, PassMark, MATLAB, RealBench, Cinebench 23 (20, 15), AIDA64, Dolphin Emulator, UserBenchmark, 3DMark, WPrime, PCMark 10, DaVinci Resolve Studio, GeekBench 6, 5.2, Blender, SuperPi, Prime95.
And how good the CPUs are in games: - Fallout 76
- DOOM: Eternal
- Valheim
- Watch Dogs Legion
- Borderlands 3
- Valorant
- Call of Duty: Warzone and Modern Warfare
- Rainbow Six Siege
- Last Man Standing
- Cyberpunk 2077
- Fortnite
- Assassin's Creed Valhalla
- Grand Theft Auto V
- Overwatch
- Red Dead Redemption 2
- Apex Legends
- Halo Infinite
- World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
- Death Stranding
After reading the results of all benchmarks and videos, you can already make an briefed decision about which processor is better to buy for gaming Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M 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% |
Xeon Platinum 8260M | 60% |
This parameter shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, Xeon Gold 6434 is 3% better than Xeon Platinum 8260M. 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% |
Xeon Platinum 8260M | 69% |
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 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, 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: Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Ghostrunner, Monster Hunter World, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Battlefield V, DOTA 2A, League of Legends (LOL), NBA 2K20, Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, Half-Life: Alyx, Hitman 3, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), Microsoft Flight Simulator, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO), Horizon Zero Dawn, Forza Horizon 4, Control, Metro Exodus.
Gaming benchmark| Fortnite | 112.8 | 121.9 | | Valorant | 128.2 | 138.5 | | Cyberpunk 2077 | 71.8 | 77.6 | | Apex Legends | 120.5 | 130.2 | | Call of Duty Warzone | 96.1 | 103.9 | | Overwatch | 103.8 | 112.2 | | Red Dead Redemption 2 | 88.5 | 95.6 | | DOOM Eternal | 64.1 | 69.3 | | Warzone | 100.0 | 108.1 | | Assassin's Creed | 107.7 | 116.4 | | Valheim | 106.4 | 115.0 |
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 that were in the comparisons not only did they have different video cards and different amounts of RAM. But users also tested them at different screen resolutions: 2K, 4K 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 6434 | 27% |
Xeon Platinum 8260M | 21% |
To make a finishing resolution 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 Xeon Platinum 8260M as it consumes less power: 195W vs. 165W. Power consumption is especially important for laptops. Also, when choosing a processor cooling system, it will be useful 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 plan to use the processor not only for gaming, but also for programming, streaming, video editing or video rendering, machine learning, then the main parameter for you is its performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, to achieve maximum efficiency, the CPU includes all cores and threads that it has. 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 program 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 are unused.
Cinebench 23, 20 an 15
The results of this benchmark show Single-threaded and Multi-threaded CPU performance | Intel Xeon Gold 6434 |
Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M | | Cinbench 15 Single-core | 885 | 211 | | Cinbench 15 Multi-core | 2858 | 5808 | | Cinbench 20 Single-core | 1964 | 366 | | Cinbench 20 Multi-core | 7051 | 14048 | | Cinbench 23 Single-core | 1368 | 1239 | | Cinbench 23 Multi-core | 40142 | 35899 |
Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | Intel Xeon Gold 6434 |
Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M | | Single-Core | 12464 | 2291 | | Multi-Core | 40862 | 34071 |
GeekBench 6, 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | Intel Xeon Gold 6434 |
Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M | | Single-Core | 1607 | 1071 | | Multi-Core | 24327 | 33238 |
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 later the processor is released, 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 even in new games. It turns out that there is no longer a need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer. The savings are obvious!
| Intel Xeon Gold 6434 |
Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M | | Announcement date | March 12, 2023 | October 01, 2020 | | Type | Server | Server | | Socket | FCLGA4677 | LGA3647 | | Core name | Sapphire Rapids | Cascade Lake | | Architecture | x86 | x86 | | Generation | 4 | 2 | | Turbo Frequency | 4.1 MHz | 3.9 MHz | | Frequency | 3.7 MHz | 2.3 MHz | | Cores | 8 | 24 | | Threads | 16 | 48 | | Bus rate | 16 GT/s | | | Bit | 64 | 64 | | Lithography | 7 nm | 14 nm | | Transistors count | 36000 millions | 7510 millions | | Power consumption (TDP) | 195 W | 165 W | | Memory type | Up to DDR5 4800 MT/s 1DPC Up to DDR5 4400 MT/s 2DPC | DDR4-2933 | | Max. Memory | 4 Gb | 1 Gb | | Memory Frequency | | | | Memory bandwidth | | | | L1 cache | | | | L2 cache | | | | L3 cache | 22.5 MB | 35.75 MB | | Overclocking | No | Yes | | Supports ECC | Yes | Yes | | Part number | | |
In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here Xeon Gold 6434 is 37% better than Xeon Platinum 8260M in terms of CPU frequency. Another difference is that Xeon Platinum 8260M has 16 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: 15
The number of parameters for which Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M is better: 19
However, it should be realized that all the figures that you have looked at here 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 reviews of of people who bought Intel Xeon Gold 6434 and Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M 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 9354
• 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 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+
Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M Processor Comparisons
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs Ryzen 9 5900
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3945WX
• Vs Ryzen 9 3950X
• Vs Ryzen 9 5900X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX
• Vs Ryzen 9 5950X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 3970X
• Vs Core i9-10980XE
• Vs Ryzen 9 3900XT
• Vs Ryzen 9 3900X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX
• Vs Core i9-9980XE
• Vs Xeon W-3175X
• Vs Core i9-9990XE
• Vs Ryzen 9 PRO 3900
• Vs Core i9-9960X
• Vs Ryzen 9 3900
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 2950X
• Vs Core i9-7980XE
• Vs Core i9-10940X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX
• Vs Apple M1X
• Vs Ryzen 7 5800X
• Vs Ryzen 7 Pro 5750G
• Vs Core i9-9940X
• Vs Core i9-11900K
• Vs Ryzen 7 5700G
• Vs Ryzen 7 Pro 5850U
• Vs Core i7-11700K
• Vs Core i9-7960X
• Vs Core i9-7940X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 2990X
• Vs Core i9-10920X
• Vs Ryzen 9 5980HX
• Vs Ryzen 9 5980HS
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs Xeon W-2275
• Vs Core i9-11900KF
• Vs Core i9-11900
• Vs Core i9-11900F
• Vs Ryzen 9 5800
• Vs Ryzen 9 5600X
• Vs Ryzen 9 5800X
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs Core i9-11900H
• Vs Core i9-11900KB
• Vs Core i9-11950H
• Vs Core i9-11980HK
• Vs Core i7-11700B
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs Core i9-12900K
• Vs Core i9-12900HK
• Vs Core i9-12900H
• Vs Core i7-12800H
• Vs Core i9-12900T
• Vs Core i9-12900TE
• Vs Core i7-12700E
• Vs Core i9-12900F
• Vs Core i9-12900E
• Vs Core i9-12900
• Vs Core i7-12700
• Vs Core i7-12700F
• Vs Core i7-12700TE
• Vs Core i7-12700T
• Vs Core i7-12700HE
• Vs Core i7-12700K
• Vs Core i7-12700KF
• Vs Core i5-12600KF
• Vs Core i5-12600K
• Vs Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 6850U
• Vs Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 6850H
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS
• Vs Core i7-12700HL
• Vs Core i7-12650HX
• Vs Core i7-12800HL
• Vs Core i7-12850HX
• Vs Ryzen 5 7600X
• Vs Core i5-13500
• Vs Core i5-13400
• Vs Apple M2
• Vs Apple M1 Pro
• Vs Apple M1 Max
• Vs Apple M2 Pro
• Vs Apple M2 Max
• Vs Core i5-13600
• Vs Core i7-13700HX
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• Vs EPYC 9654
• Vs EPYC 9634
• Vs EPYC 9554
• Vs EPYC 9554P
• Vs EPYC 9534
• Vs EPYC 9124
• Vs EPYC 9224
• Vs EPYC 9174F
• Vs EPYC 9254
• Vs EPYC 9274F
• 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 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+
|
|
|
