EPYC 9454 vs Xeon Platinum 8368

CPU

GPU

EPYC 9454

48 Cores96 Thrd290 WWMax: 3.8 GHz2022

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Xeon Platinum 8368

38 Cores76 Thrd270 WWMax: 3.4 GHz2021

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

EPYC 9454

48 / 96

87,961

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5955WX

Ryzen 9 7945HX3D

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7970X

Ryzen Threadripper 9970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7980X

Xeon Platinum 8368

38 / 76

92,054

+4.7%

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 9454

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $1,989 less on MSRP ($5,225 MSRP vs $7,214 MSRP).
✅Delivers 31.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 16.8 vs 12.8 PassMark/$ ($5,225 MSRP vs $7,214 MSRP).
✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA4189 and DDR4.
✅100% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 64) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (87,961 vs 92,054).
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Xeon Platinum 8368

2021

Why buy it

✅+4.7% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 270W instead of 290W, a 20W reduction.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9454 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.8 vs 16.8 PassMark/$ ($7,214 MSRP vs $5,225 MSRP).
❌Older platform position on LGA4189 with DDR4, while EPYC 9454 moves to SP5 and DDR5.

EPYC 9454

2022

Xeon Platinum 8368

2021

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $1,989 less on MSRP ($5,225 MSRP vs $7,214 MSRP).
✅Delivers 31.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 16.8 vs 12.8 PassMark/$ ($5,225 MSRP vs $7,214 MSRP).
✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA4189 and DDR4.
✅100% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 64) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅+4.7% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 270W instead of 290W, a 20W reduction.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (87,961 vs 92,054).
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9454 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.8 vs 16.8 PassMark/$ ($7,214 MSRP vs $5,225 MSRP).
❌Older platform position on LGA4189 with DDR4, while EPYC 9454 moves to SP5 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9454 better than Xeon Platinum 8368?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, EPYC 9454 is ahead with a 5.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Xeon Platinum 8368 pulls ahead with 4.7% better PassMark. EPYC 9454 also has the bigger cache pool with 349.1% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 57 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon Platinum 8368 is the better fit. You are getting 4.7% better PassMark, backed by 38 cores and 76 threads.

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

EPYC 9454 is the smarter buy today. EPYC 9454 is $1,989 cheaper on MSRP at $5,225 MSRP versus $7,214 MSRP, and it gives you a 5.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Xeon Platinum 8368 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 4.7% better PassMark. It is also 31.9% better value on MSRP (16.8 vs 12.8 PassMark/$), 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 9454 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2022 vs 2021), a healthier platform with SP5 and DDR5 instead of LGA4189, and 3D V-Cache and a much larger 256 MB L3 cache instead of 57 MB. 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 9454 Benchmark Check

Xeon Platinum 8368 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9454	Xeon Platinum 8368
1080p
low	171 FPS	185 FPS
medium	142 FPS	149 FPS
high	122 FPS	120 FPS
ultra	96 FPS	94 FPS
1440p
low	149 FPS	154 FPS
medium	120 FPS	120 FPS
high	97 FPS	93 FPS
ultra	77 FPS	74 FPS
4K
low	70 FPS	72 FPS
medium	60 FPS	60 FPS
high	47 FPS	46 FPS
ultra	39 FPS	38 FPS

Open EPYC 9454 Open Xeon Platinum 8368

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9454	Xeon Platinum 8368
1080p
low	533 FPS	412 FPS
medium	465 FPS	361 FPS
high	373 FPS	294 FPS
ultra	303 FPS	235 FPS
1440p
low	438 FPS	353 FPS
medium	392 FPS	314 FPS
high	323 FPS	264 FPS
ultra	255 FPS	203 FPS
4K
low	270 FPS	219 FPS
medium	246 FPS	198 FPS
high	216 FPS	167 FPS
ultra	179 FPS	135 FPS

Open EPYC 9454 Open Xeon Platinum 8368

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9454	Xeon Platinum 8368
1080p
low	672 FPS	935 FPS
medium	561 FPS	817 FPS
high	522 FPS	766 FPS
ultra	455 FPS	680 FPS
1440p
low	511 FPS	746 FPS
medium	426 FPS	643 FPS
high	390 FPS	603 FPS
ultra	337 FPS	535 FPS
4K
low	377 FPS	479 FPS
medium	294 FPS	378 FPS
high	263 FPS	334 FPS
ultra	211 FPS	272 FPS

Open EPYC 9454 Open Xeon Platinum 8368

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9454	Xeon Platinum 8368
1080p
low	902 FPS	911 FPS
medium	822 FPS	828 FPS
high	708 FPS	714 FPS
ultra	625 FPS	613 FPS
1440p
low	724 FPS	712 FPS
medium	631 FPS	625 FPS
high	540 FPS	537 FPS
ultra	462 FPS	460 FPS
4K
low	519 FPS	514 FPS
medium	464 FPS	459 FPS
high	407 FPS	403 FPS
ultra	350 FPS	351 FPS

Open EPYC 9454 Open Xeon Platinum 8368

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9454 and Xeon Platinum 8368

EPYC 9454

The EPYC 9454 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 November 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture. It features 48 cores and 96 threads. Base frequency is 2.75 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm, 6 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 290 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 87,961 points. Launch price was $5,225.

Xeon Platinum 8368

The Xeon Platinum 8368 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2021-04-06. It is based on the Ice Lake-SP (2021) architecture. It features 38 cores and 76 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 57 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4189. Thermal design power (TDP): 270 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 92,054 points. Launch price was $7,214.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9454 packs 48 cores / 96 threads, while the Xeon Platinum 8368 offers 38 cores / 76 threads — the EPYC 9454 has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the EPYC 9454 versus 3.4 GHz on the Xeon Platinum 8368 — a 11.1% clock advantage for the EPYC 9454 (base: 2.75 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The EPYC 9454 uses the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture (5 nm, 6 nm), while the Xeon Platinum 8368 uses Ice Lake-SP (2021) (10 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9454 scores 87,961 against the Xeon Platinum 8368's 92,054 — a 4.5% lead for the Xeon Platinum 8368. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9454 vs 57 MB (total) on the Xeon Platinum 8368.

Feature	EPYC 9454	Xeon Platinum 8368
Cores / Threads	48 / 96+26%	38 / 76
Boost Clock	3.8 GHz+12%	3.4 GHz
Base Clock	2.75 GHz+15%	2.4 GHz
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)+349%	57 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	1 MB (per core)
Process	5 nm, 6 nm-50%	10 nm
Architecture	Genoa (2022−2023)	Ice Lake-SP (2021)
PassMark	87,961	92,054+5%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	20,000
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,961
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	25,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9454 uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon Platinum 8368 uses LGA4189 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800 on the EPYC 9454 versus DDR4-3200 on the Xeon Platinum 8368 — the EPYC 9454 supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 6 TB of RAM. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9454) vs 8 (Xeon Platinum 8368). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9454) vs 64 (Xeon Platinum 8368) — the EPYC 9454 offers 64 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9454) and C621A (Xeon Platinum 8368).

Feature	EPYC 9454	Xeon Platinum 8368
Socket	SP5	LGA4189
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800+25%	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	6 TB	6 TB
RAM Channels	12+50%	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+100%	64

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9454) vs VT-x, VT-d (Xeon Platinum 8368). Primary use case: EPYC 9454 targets Data Center, Xeon Platinum 8368 targets Server. Direct competitor: EPYC 9454 rivals Xeon Platinum 8468; Xeon Platinum 8368 rivals EPYC 7543.

Feature	EPYC 9454	Xeon Platinum 8368
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	Yes
Virtualization	AMD-V, SEV-SNP	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	Data Center	Server

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9454 launched at $5225 MSRP, while the Xeon Platinum 8368 debuted at $7214. On MSRP ($5225 vs $7214), the EPYC 9454 is $1989 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9454 delivers 16.8 pts/$ vs 12.8 pts/$ for the Xeon Platinum 8368 — making the EPYC 9454 the 27.5% better value option.