EPYC 7282 vs Xeon Platinum 8180M

CPU

GPU

EPYC 7282

16 Cores32 Thrd120 WWMax: 3.2 GHz2019

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Xeon Platinum 8180M

28 Cores56 Thrd205 WWMax: 3.8 GHz2017

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

EPYC 7282

16 / 32

30,201

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX

Xeon Platinum 8180M

28 / 56

30,313

+0.4%

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 7282

2019

Why buy it

✅+66.2% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 39 MB).
✅Draws 120W instead of 205W, a 85W reduction.
✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 48) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon Platinum 8180M across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (13,500 vs 25,000).
❌Launch MSRP is still $650 MSRP, while Xeon Platinum 8180M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Xeon Platinum 8180M

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +33.3% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (39 MB vs 64 MB).
❌70.8% higher power demand at 205W vs 120W.

EPYC 7282

2019

Xeon Platinum 8180M

2017

Why buy it

✅+66.2% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 39 MB).
✅Draws 120W instead of 205W, a 85W reduction.
✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 48) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +33.3% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon Platinum 8180M across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (13,500 vs 25,000).
❌Launch MSRP is still $650 MSRP, while Xeon Platinum 8180M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (39 MB vs 64 MB).
❌70.8% higher power demand at 205W vs 120W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon Platinum 8180M better than EPYC 7282?

Yes. Xeon Platinum 8180M is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 33.3% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data, 85.2% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, and 0.4% higher PassMark, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Xeon Platinum 8180M is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 33.3% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon Platinum 8180M is the better fit. You are getting 85.2% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 28 cores and 56 threads.

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

Xeon Platinum 8180M is still the faster CPU overall, but EPYC 7282 makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Xeon Platinum 8180M is at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $650 MSRP, and it gives you a 33.3% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. EPYC 7282 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (46.5 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

EPYC 7282 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2017) and 66.2% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 39 MB). That makes it the safer long-term pick.

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 7282 Benchmark Check

Xeon Platinum 8180M Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 7282	Xeon Platinum 8180M
1080p
low	159 FPS	192 FPS
medium	129 FPS	156 FPS
high	108 FPS	127 FPS
ultra	86 FPS	99 FPS
1440p
low	140 FPS	158 FPS
medium	112 FPS	124 FPS
high	89 FPS	97 FPS
ultra	71 FPS	77 FPS
4K
low	68 FPS	72 FPS
medium	57 FPS	60 FPS
high	45 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	37 FPS	39 FPS

Open EPYC 7282 Open Xeon Platinum 8180M

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 7282	Xeon Platinum 8180M
1080p
low	419 FPS	442 FPS
medium	371 FPS	386 FPS
high	305 FPS	315 FPS
ultra	245 FPS	259 FPS
1440p
low	353 FPS	381 FPS
medium	319 FPS	336 FPS
high	270 FPS	277 FPS
ultra	208 FPS	220 FPS
4K
low	219 FPS	238 FPS
medium	201 FPS	211 FPS
high	171 FPS	187 FPS
ultra	138 FPS	154 FPS

Open EPYC 7282 Open Xeon Platinum 8180M

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 7282	Xeon Platinum 8180M
1080p
low	632 FPS	758 FPS
medium	514 FPS	758 FPS
high	458 FPS	758 FPS
ultra	402 FPS	758 FPS
1440p
low	493 FPS	722 FPS
medium	400 FPS	626 FPS
high	351 FPS	595 FPS
ultra	305 FPS	532 FPS
4K
low	367 FPS	462 FPS
medium	285 FPS	365 FPS
high	243 FPS	326 FPS
ultra	197 FPS	267 FPS

Open EPYC 7282 Open Xeon Platinum 8180M

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 7282	Xeon Platinum 8180M
1080p
low	755 FPS	758 FPS
medium	755 FPS	758 FPS
high	664 FPS	733 FPS
ultra	581 FPS	636 FPS
1440p
low	663 FPS	738 FPS
medium	584 FPS	647 FPS
high	501 FPS	556 FPS
ultra	427 FPS	476 FPS
4K
low	475 FPS	532 FPS
medium	428 FPS	474 FPS
high	376 FPS	417 FPS
ultra	323 FPS	360 FPS

Open EPYC 7282 Open Xeon Platinum 8180M

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 7282 and Xeon Platinum 8180M

EPYC 7282

The EPYC 7282 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 August 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB. L2 cache: 8 MB. Built on 7 nm, 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 120 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 30,201 points. Launch price was $650.

Xeon Platinum 8180M

The Xeon Platinum 8180M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 July 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (server) (2017−2018) architecture. It features 28 cores and 56 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 38.5 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 205 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 30,313 points. Launch price was $13,011.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 7282 packs 16 cores / 32 threads, while the Xeon Platinum 8180M offers 28 cores / 56 threads — the Xeon Platinum 8180M has 12 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the EPYC 7282 versus 3.8 GHz on the Xeon Platinum 8180M — a 17.1% clock advantage for the Xeon Platinum 8180M (base: 2.8 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The EPYC 7282 uses the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture (7 nm, 14 nm), while the Xeon Platinum 8180M uses Skylake (server) (2017−2018) (14 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7282 scores 30,201 against the Xeon Platinum 8180M's 30,313 — a 0.4% lead for the Xeon Platinum 8180M. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 13,500 vs 25,000 (59.7% advantage for the Xeon Platinum 8180M). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,086 vs 1,000, a 8.2% lead for the EPYC 7282 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 7,638 vs 21,854 (96.4% advantage for the Xeon Platinum 8180M). L3 cache: 64 MB on the EPYC 7282 vs 38.5 MB (total) on the Xeon Platinum 8180M.

Feature	EPYC 7282	Xeon Platinum 8180M
Cores / Threads	16 / 32	28 / 56+75%
Boost Clock	3.2 GHz	3.8 GHz+19%
Base Clock	2.8 GHz+12%	2.5 GHz
L3 Cache	64 MB+66%	38.5 MB (total)
L2 Cache	8 MB+700%	1 MB (per core)
Process	7 nm, 14 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Zen 2 (2017−2020)	Skylake (server) (2017−2018)
PassMark	30,201	30,313
Cinebench R23 Multi	13,500	25,000+85%
Geekbench 6 Single	1,086+9%	1,000
Geekbench 6 Multi	7,638	21,854+186%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 7282 uses the SP3 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon Platinum 8180M uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-3200 memory speed. The EPYC 7282 supports up to 4096 GB of RAM compared to 1536 GB — 90.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 8 (EPYC 7282) vs 6 (Xeon Platinum 8180M). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 7282) vs 48 (Xeon Platinum 8180M) — the EPYC 7282 offers 80 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP3,Rome (EPYC 7282) and C620 (Xeon Platinum 8180M).

Feature	EPYC 7282	Xeon Platinum 8180M
Socket	SP3	LGA3647
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0+33%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-3200	DDR4-2666
Max RAM Capacity	4096 GB+167%	1536 GB
RAM Channels	8+33%	6
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+167%	48

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the Xeon Platinum 8180M supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: AMD-V, SEV (EPYC 7282) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon Platinum 8180M). Primary use case: EPYC 7282 targets Edge Server / Entry Server, Xeon Platinum 8180M targets Mission Critical Datacenter. Direct competitor: EPYC 7282 rivals Xeon Silver 4216; Xeon Platinum 8180M rivals EPYC 7551.