EPYC 4364P vs Xeon Platinum 8260M

CPU

GPU

EPYC 4364P

8 Cores16 Thrd105 WWMax: 5.4 GHz2024

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Xeon Platinum 8260M

24 Cores48 Thrd165 WWMax: 3.9 GHz2019

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

EPYC 4364P

8 / 16

34,215

+0.7%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7970X

Xeon Platinum 8260M

24 / 48

33,970

0.0%

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

EPYC 4364P

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +33.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $7,306 less on MSRP ($399 MSRP vs $7,705 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1845.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 85.8 vs 4.4 PassMark/$ ($399 MSRP vs $7,705 MSRP).
✅Draws 105W instead of 165W, a 60W reduction.
✅Newer platform on AM5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA3647 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (21,000 vs 30,500).

Xeon Platinum 8260M

2019

Why buy it

✅+45.2% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
✅71.4% more PCIe lanes (48 vs 28) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4364P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 4.4 vs 85.8 PassMark/$ ($7,705 MSRP vs $399 MSRP).
❌57.1% higher power demand at 165W vs 105W.
❌Older platform position on LGA3647 with DDR4, while EPYC 4364P moves to AM5 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while EPYC 4364P can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

EPYC 4364P

2024

Xeon Platinum 8260M

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +33.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $7,306 less on MSRP ($399 MSRP vs $7,705 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1845.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 85.8 vs 4.4 PassMark/$ ($399 MSRP vs $7,705 MSRP).
✅Draws 105W instead of 165W, a 60W reduction.
✅Newer platform on AM5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA3647 and DDR4.

Why buy it

✅+45.2% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
✅71.4% more PCIe lanes (48 vs 28) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (21,000 vs 30,500).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4364P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 4.4 vs 85.8 PassMark/$ ($7,705 MSRP vs $399 MSRP).
❌57.1% higher power demand at 165W vs 105W.
❌Older platform position on LGA3647 with DDR4, while EPYC 4364P moves to AM5 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while EPYC 4364P can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 4364P better than Xeon Platinum 8260M?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, EPYC 4364P is ahead with a 33.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Xeon Platinum 8260M pulls ahead with 45.2% better Cinebench R23 multi-core.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon Platinum 8260M is the better fit. You are getting 45.2% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 24 cores and 48 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

EPYC 4364P is the smarter buy today. EPYC 4364P is $7,306 cheaper on MSRP at $399 MSRP versus $7,705 MSRP, and it gives you a 33.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Xeon Platinum 8260M is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 45.2% better Cinebench R23 multi-core. It is also 1845.0% better value on MSRP (85.8 vs 4.4 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

EPYC 4364P is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2019) and a healthier platform with AM5 and DDR5 instead of LGA3647. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

EPYC 4364P Benchmark Check

Xeon Platinum 8260M Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 4364P	Xeon Platinum 8260M
1080p
low	249 FPS	194 FPS
medium	232 FPS	158 FPS
high	201 FPS	127 FPS
ultra	173 FPS	98 FPS
1440p
low	218 FPS	158 FPS
medium	183 FPS	123 FPS
high	152 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	134 FPS	76 FPS
4K
low	152 FPS	72 FPS
medium	127 FPS	60 FPS
high	99 FPS	46 FPS
ultra	86 FPS	38 FPS

Open EPYC 4364P Open Xeon Platinum 8260M

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 4364P	Xeon Platinum 8260M
1080p
low	710 FPS	423 FPS
medium	565 FPS	368 FPS
high	465 FPS	300 FPS
ultra	413 FPS	247 FPS
1440p
low	597 FPS	365 FPS
medium	499 FPS	321 FPS
high	417 FPS	264 FPS
ultra	351 FPS	210 FPS
4K
low	348 FPS	228 FPS
medium	297 FPS	202 FPS
high	278 FPS	178 FPS
ultra	241 FPS	146 FPS

Open EPYC 4364P Open Xeon Platinum 8260M

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 4364P	Xeon Platinum 8260M
1080p
low	855 FPS	794 FPS
medium	855 FPS	649 FPS
high	855 FPS	600 FPS
ultra	855 FPS	530 FPS
1440p
low	855 FPS	573 FPS
medium	855 FPS	467 FPS
high	790 FPS	425 FPS
ultra	656 FPS	372 FPS
4K
low	582 FPS	411 FPS
medium	500 FPS	321 FPS
high	450 FPS	286 FPS
ultra	380 FPS	232 FPS

Open EPYC 4364P Open Xeon Platinum 8260M

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 4364P	Xeon Platinum 8260M
1080p
low	855 FPS	849 FPS
medium	855 FPS	849 FPS
high	855 FPS	753 FPS
ultra	852 FPS	655 FPS
1440p
low	855 FPS	752 FPS
medium	855 FPS	659 FPS
high	766 FPS	566 FPS
ultra	647 FPS	486 FPS
4K
low	682 FPS	542 FPS
medium	600 FPS	483 FPS
high	531 FPS	424 FPS
ultra	437 FPS	366 FPS

Open EPYC 4364P Open Xeon Platinum 8260M

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 4364P and Xeon Platinum 8260M

EPYC 4364P

The EPYC 4364P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 21 May 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Raphael (2023−2025) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 4.5 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: AM5. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 34,215 points. Launch price was $399.

Xeon Platinum 8260M

The Xeon Platinum 8260M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 December 2018 (6 years ago). It is based on the Cascade Lake-SP (2018) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 35.75 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 165 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 33,970 points. Launch price was $7,705.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 4364P packs 8 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon Platinum 8260M offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the Xeon Platinum 8260M has 16 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.4 GHz on the EPYC 4364P versus 3.9 GHz on the Xeon Platinum 8260M — a 32.3% clock advantage for the EPYC 4364P (base: 4.5 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The EPYC 4364P uses the Raphael (2023−2025) architecture (5 nm), while the Xeon Platinum 8260M uses Cascade Lake-SP (2018) (14 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 4364P scores 34,215 against the Xeon Platinum 8260M's 33,970 — a 0.7% lead for the EPYC 4364P. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 21,000 vs 30,500 (36.9% advantage for the Xeon Platinum 8260M). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 3,085 vs 1,200, a 88% lead for the EPYC 4364P that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 15,594 vs 10,491 (39.1% advantage for the EPYC 4364P). L3 cache: 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 4364P vs 35.75 MB (total) on the Xeon Platinum 8260M.

Feature	EPYC 4364P	Xeon Platinum 8260M
Cores / Threads	8 / 16	24 / 48+200%
Boost Clock	5.4 GHz+38%	3.9 GHz
Base Clock	4.5 GHz+88%	2.4 GHz
L3 Cache	32 MB (total)	35.75 MB (total)+12%
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	1 MB (per core)
Process	5 nm-64%	14 nm
Architecture	Raphael (2023−2025)	Cascade Lake-SP (2018)
PassMark	34,215	33,970
Cinebench R23 Multi	21,000	30,500+45%
Geekbench 6 Single	3,085+157%	1,200
Geekbench 6 Multi	15,594+49%	10,491

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 4364P uses the AM5 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon Platinum 8260M uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-5200 on the EPYC 4364P versus DDR4-2933 on the Xeon Platinum 8260M — the EPYC 4364P supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon Platinum 8260M supports up to 2048 GB of RAM compared to 192 GB — 165.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (EPYC 4364P) vs 6 (Xeon Platinum 8260M). PCIe lanes: 28 (EPYC 4364P) vs 48 (Xeon Platinum 8260M) — the Xeon Platinum 8260M offers 20 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: B650,X670,X870 (EPYC 4364P) and C621,C622,C624,C627,C628 (Xeon Platinum 8260M).

Feature	EPYC 4364P	Xeon Platinum 8260M
Socket	AM5	LGA3647
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0+33%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-5200+25%	DDR4-2933
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB	2048 GB+967%
RAM Channels	2	6+200%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	28	48+71%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: AMD-V, AMD-Vi (EPYC 4364P) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon Platinum 8260M). The EPYC 4364P includes integrated graphics (Radeon Graphics), while the Xeon Platinum 8260M requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: EPYC 4364P targets Entry Server, Xeon Platinum 8260M targets Server (Memory Optimized). Direct competitor: EPYC 4364P rivals Xeon E-2488; Xeon Platinum 8260M rivals Xeon Platinum 8268.

Feature	EPYC 4364P	Xeon Platinum 8260M
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Radeon Graphics	—
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	AMD-V, AMD-Vi	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	Entry Server	Server (Memory Optimized)

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 4364P launched at $399 MSRP, while the Xeon Platinum 8260M debuted at $7705. On MSRP ($399 vs $7705), the EPYC 4364P is $7306 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 4364P delivers 85.8 pts/$ vs 4.4 pts/$ for the Xeon Platinum 8260M — making the EPYC 4364P the 180.4% better value option.