 |
AMD EPYC 9174F vs Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 |
|
Processor comparisons 11-03-2023
Let's say you are thinking about choosing a processor, you will be able to make a decision after reading the detailed tests AMD EPYC 9174F vs Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 and see which is better for games or normal use for video editing, rendering, programming, machine learning, streaming. Here you can find all information from real streaming and video editing tests or several benchmarks. A careful review of all the technical characteristics, to make it easier to read, is made by the table.
From the video comparison, you can get the results of parallel examination in special testing software such as World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, Prime95, UserBenchmark, Handbrake, PassMark, Gears 5, AIDA64, Blender, SuperPi, WPrime, 3DMark, DaVinci Resolve Studio, MATLAB, PCMark 10, RealBench, 7zip, GeekBench 6, 5.2, Furmark, Dolphin Emulator, VeraCrypt, Cinebench 23 (20, 15), Blender.
Gaming performance of CPUs in: - Apex Legends
- World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
- Death Stranding
- Overwatch
- Fortnite
- DOOM: Eternal
- Cyberpunk 2077
- Valheim
- Borderlands 3
- Assassin's Creed Valhalla
- Grand Theft Auto V
- Fallout 76
- Red Dead Redemption 2
- Valorant
- Rainbow Six Siege
- Call of Duty: Warzone and Modern Warfare
- Watch Dogs Legion
- Halo Infinite
- Last Man Standing
After looking at the data of joint benchmarks and videos, you already be able to know which processor is better to buy for gaming Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 or AMD EPYC 9174F.
Summary benchmark resultsAs a percentage of the maximum value based on a sample from the entire base of all processors
Processor Benchmark
| EPYC 9174F | 66% |
Xeon E5-2697R v4 | 55% |
This value shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, EPYC 9174F is 16% better than Xeon E5-2697R v4. The data source is several popular tests. Detailed information can be found below.
Gaming performance
Summary result of all game benchmarks.| EPYC 9174F | 70% |
Xeon E5-2697R v4 | 61% |
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 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, just look at the FPS that it produces in real games in the final table below.
List of other games in which processors were compared: The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, DOTA 2A, League of Legends (LOL), Ghostrunner, Monster Hunter World, Hitman 3, Battlefield V, Horizon Zero Dawn, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), Metro Exodus, Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, Forza Horizon 4, Microsoft Flight Simulator, Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Control, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO), Half-Life: Alyx, NBA 2K20.
Gaming benchmark| Fortnite | 123.8 | 108.6 | | Valorant | 140.7 | 123.4 | | Cyberpunk 2077 | 78.8 | 69.1 | | Apex Legends | 132.2 | 116.0 | | Call of Duty Warzone | 105.5 | 92.6 | | Overwatch | 113.9 | 100.0 | | Red Dead Redemption 2 | 97.1 | 85.2 | | DOOM Eternal | 70.3 | 61.7 | | Warzone | 109.7 | 96.3 | | Assassin's Creed | 118.2 | 103.7 | | Valheim | 116.7 | 102.5 |
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 tested computers not only did they have different video cards and different amounts of RAM. But users also tested them at different screen resolutions: FullHD, 2K 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
| EPYC 9174F | 18% |
Xeon E5-2697R v4 | 20% |
To make a final decision 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 E5-2697R v4 is more energy efficient than the EPYC 9174F as it consumes less power: 320W vs. 145W. Power consumption is particularly important for laptops. Also, when choosing a processor cooling system, it will be useful 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 benchmarksIf you want to use the processor not only for gaming, but also for video editing or video rendering, machine learning, streaming, programming, then the main parameter for you is its performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, the CPU includes all threads and cores that it has to the maximum to achieve maximum efficiency. You will learn this data from the benchmark tables below. Before you take into account the data from these tests, be sure to make sure that the software that you are going to use on your computer can work in multi-threaded mode. Since there are still many programs that use only one core to run, 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 | AMD EPYC 9174F |
Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 | | Cinbench 15 Single-core | 134 | 108 | | Cinbench 15 Multi-core | 6722 | 3177 | | Cinbench 20 Single-core | 277 | 240 | | Cinbench 20 Multi-core | 14279 | 7475 | | Cinbench 23 Single-core | 727 | 641 | | Cinbench 23 Multi-core | 37179 | 18061 |
Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | AMD EPYC 9174F |
Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 | | Single-Core | 1672 | 1916 | | Multi-Core | 54549 | 18383 |
GeekBench 6, 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | AMD EPYC 9174F |
Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 | | Single-Core | 1781 | 910 | | Multi-Core | 35081 | 20218 |
Comparison of specifications
In the specification comparison table, the processor release date and overclocking capability will be the most helpful. 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, thereby increasing its performance, then it will still be able to produce maximum FPS in the newest games. Accordingly, you do not need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer. The economy are obvious!
| AMD EPYC 9174F |
Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 | | Announcement date | November 10, 2022 | January 01, 2021 | | Type | Server | Server | | Socket | SP5 | FCLGA2011-3 | | Core name | Genoa | Broadwell | | Architecture | Zen 4 | x86 | | Generation | 4 | 4 | | Turbo Frequency | 4.4 MHz | 3.6 MHz | | Frequency | 4.1 MHz | 2.3 MHz | | Cores | 16 | 18 | | Threads | 32 | 36 | | Bus rate | | 9.6 GT/s | | Bit | 64 | 64 | | Lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm | | Transistors count | 64000 millions | 4130 millions | | Power consumption (TDP) | 320 W | 145 W | | Memory type | DDR5 | DDR4 1600/1866/2133/2400 | | Max. Memory | 4096 Gb | 15 Gb | | Memory Frequency | 4800 | | | Memory bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s | | L1 cache | | | | L2 cache | | | | L3 cache | 256MB | 45 MB | | Overclocking | No | Yes | | Supports ECC | Yes | Yes | | Part number | 100-000000796
100-100000796WOF | |
In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here EPYC 9174F is 43% better than Xeon E5-2697R v4 in terms of CPU frequency. Another difference is that Xeon E5-2697R v4 has 2 more core than EPYC 9174F. Also keep in mind that high CPU frequency affects battery life through power consumption (relevant for laptops).
Result:
The number of parameters for which AMD EPYC 9174F is better: 27
The number of parameters for which Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 is better: 8
However, it should be realized that all the number in the table above do not mean that taking them into account you should fully trust a simple comparison of these numbers. Be sure to watch the testing video and read the reviews of of people who bought AMD EPYC 9174F and Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 before making a choice which processor to buy for gaming and which not.
AMD EPYC 9174F Processor Comparisons
• Vs EPYC 7F52
• Vs EPYC 7452
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs EPYC 7272
• Vs Xeon E-2234
• Vs EPYC 7513
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs EPYC 7713
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 9654
• Vs EPYC 9124
• Vs Xeon Gold 6246R
• Vs EPYC 7443
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 7763
• Vs EPYC 7502
• Vs EPYC 9224
• Vs EPYC 7742
• Vs EPYC 7F72
• Vs EPYC 7702
• Vs EPYC 74F3
• Vs EPYC 7443P
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs EPYC 7663
• Vs EPYC 7543
• Vs EPYC 7453
• Vs Xeon Gold 6248R
• Vs EPYC 7543P
• Vs EPYC 75F3
• Vs Xeon W-3275M
• Vs EPYC 9634
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs EPYC 9534
• Vs EPYC 9654P
• Vs EPYC 9554P
• Vs Xeon Gold 6242R
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs EPYC 7413
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs EPYC 9554
• Vs EPYC 7643
• Vs Xeon D-1602
• Vs Xeon W-3245
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8260M
• 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 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 Gold 6416H
• Vs Xeon Silver 4416+
Intel Xeon E5-2697R v4 Processor Comparisons
• Vs Core i7-9700E
• Vs Ryzen 7 5800
• Vs Core i9-9900K
• Vs Ryzen 5 3600XT
• Vs Ryzen 7 4800H
• Vs Core i7-10700K
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 4750GE
• Vs Core i5-11600K
• Vs Ryzen 9 4900U
• Vs Ryzen 5 5600G
• Vs Apple M1
• Vs Ryzen 5 5600X
• Vs Ryzen 7 5800U
• Vs Ryzen 7 3700X
• Vs Ryzen 9 5900HS
• Vs Core i9-10850K
• Vs Ryzen 7 3800X
• Vs Ryzen 9 5900HX
• Vs Core i9-10900K
• Vs Core i9-9920X
• Vs Ryzen 7 5800H
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 2920X
• Vs Ryzen 9 5980HS
• Vs Core i9-10920X
• Vs Ryzen 9 5980HX
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
• Vs Core i9-7940X
• Vs Core i9-7960X
• Vs Core i7-11700K
• Vs Ryzen 7 Pro 5850U
• Vs Ryzen 5 3600X
• Vs Core i7-10700
• Vs Ryzen 5 3600
• Vs Ryzen 7 2700X
• Vs Core i7-10700F
• Vs Core i7-10875H
• Vs Ryzen 7 2700
• Vs Ryzen 5 4600H
• Vs Core i5-10600K
• Vs Ryzen 7 1700
• Vs Core i7-9700K
• Vs Ryzen 5 2600X
• Vs Core i7-8700K
• Vs Ryzen 7 4700U
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 2600
• Vs Core i7-9700
• Vs Ryzen 5 3500X
• Vs Ryzen 5 2600
• Vs Core i7-8700
• Vs Ryzen 3 3300X
• Vs Core i7-10750H
• Vs Core i5-10400F
• Vs Core i5-10400
• Vs Ryzen 5 1600
• Vs Ryzen 3 4300GE
• Vs Ryzen 3 3100
• Vs Core i5-1145G7
• Vs Core i7-1160G7
• Vs Ryzen 5 4500U
• Vs Xeon W-1290T
• Vs EPYC 7F32
• Vs Core i5-10600
• Vs Core i5-10500
• Vs Core i7-10700T
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 4400GE
• Vs Core i7-10870H
• Vs Ryzen 5 4600HS
• Vs Xeon Gold 6130T
• Vs Ryzen 5 4600U
• Vs Xeon E5-2680R v4
• Vs Xeon W-2235
• Vs Core i7-11800H
• Vs Core i9-11900T
• Vs Core i7-11700
• Vs Core i7-11700F
• Vs Core i7-11700T
• Vs Ryzen 7 3800XT
• Vs Core i5-11600KF
• Vs Core i5-11600
• Vs Core i5-11600T
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 3700
• Vs Core i5-11500
• Vs Core i5-11500T
• Vs Core i5-11400
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 1920X
• Vs Core i5-11400F
• Vs Core i5-11400T
• Vs Ryzen 5 5600HS
• Vs Ryzen 5 5500U
• Vs Ryzen 7 5700U
• Vs Ryzen 5 5600H
• Vs Ryzen 5 5600U
• Vs Core i9-10910
• Vs Core i9-10900X
• Vs Core i7-10700KF
• Vs Core i9-9900X
• Vs Core i9-7900X
• Vs Core i9-10900F
• Vs Core i9-10900
• Vs Core i9-9820X
• Vs Core i9-9900KS
• Vs Core i7-7900X
• Vs Core i9-10900T
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 4700G
• Vs Core i9-9900KF
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 3600
• Vs Ryzen 7 4700G
• Vs Core i7-9800X
• Vs Ryzen 9 4900H
• Vs Ryzen 9 4900HS
• Vs Ryzen 7 4800HS
• Vs Ryzen 7 4700GE
• Vs Ryzen 7 Extreme Edition
• Vs Core i7-7820X
• Vs Ryzen 7 4800U
• Vs Core i7-6950X
• Vs Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
• Vs Core i9-9900
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 2700X
• Vs Core i9-10980HK
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 4650G
• Vs Core i9-10885H
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 4400G
• Vs Ryzen 7 1800X
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 4650GE
• Vs Ryzen 5 4600GE
• Vs Core i9-10900TE
• Vs Core i9-10900E
• Vs Core i5-1155G7
• Vs Core i5-11500B
• Vs Core i5-11400H
• Vs Core i5-11500H
• Vs Core i7-12700H
• Vs Core i5-1230U
• Vs Core i5-1240U
• Vs Core i7-1250U
• Vs Core i5-1235U
• Vs Core i5-1245U
• Vs Core i7-1255U
• Vs Core i7-1260U
• Vs Core i7-1265U
• Vs Core i3-1220P
• Vs Core i5-1240P
• Vs Core i5-1250P
• Vs Core i3-12100
• Vs Core i3-12100E
• Vs Core i3-12100F
• Vs Core i3-12100T
• Vs Core i3-12100TE
• Vs Core i3-12300T
• Vs Ryzen 7 PRO 5875U
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 5675U
• Vs Ryzen 5 PRO 5650GE
• Vs Core i7-1265UE
• Vs Core i7-1265UL
• Vs Core i7-1255UL
• Vs Core i5-1235UL
• Vs Core i5-1245UL
• Vs Core i5-1245UE
• Vs Core i3-1220PE
• 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 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 7742
• Vs EPYC 7713P
• Vs EPYC 7H12
• Vs EPYC 72F3
• Vs EPYC 7313
• Vs EPYC 7313P
• Vs EPYC 7343
• Vs EPYC 73F3
• 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 7763
• Vs EPYC 7773X
• Vs Xeon Platinum 8444H
• Vs Xeon Gold 5416S
• Vs Xeon Gold 6416H
• Vs Xeon Silver 4416+
|
|
|
