EPYC 9354P vs Xeon 6737P

CPU

GPU

EPYC 9354P

32 Cores64 Thrd280 WWMax: 3.8 GHz2022

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Xeon 6737P

32 Cores64 Thrd270 WWMax: 4 GHz2025

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

EPYC 9354P

32 / 64

74,808

0.0%

Ryzen AI Max 390

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX

Ryzen 9 7945HX3D

Ryzen 9 9950X

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Ryzen Threadripper 7970X

Ryzen Threadripper 9970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Xeon 6737P

32 / 64

79,634

+6.5%

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 9354P

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +9.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+77.8% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 144 MB).
✅Costs $2,265 less on MSRP ($2,730 MSRP vs $4,995 MSRP).
✅Delivers 71.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 27.4 vs 15.9 PassMark/$ ($2,730 MSRP vs $4,995 MSRP).
✅45.5% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 88) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (74,808 vs 79,634).

Xeon 6737P

2025

Why buy it

✅+6.5% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 270W instead of 280W, a 10W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9354P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (144 MB vs 256 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.9 vs 27.4 PassMark/$ ($4,995 MSRP vs $2,730 MSRP).

EPYC 9354P

2022

Xeon 6737P

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +9.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+77.8% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 144 MB).
✅Costs $2,265 less on MSRP ($2,730 MSRP vs $4,995 MSRP).
✅Delivers 71.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 27.4 vs 15.9 PassMark/$ ($2,730 MSRP vs $4,995 MSRP).
✅45.5% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 88) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅+6.5% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 270W instead of 280W, a 10W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (74,808 vs 79,634).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9354P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (144 MB vs 256 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.9 vs 27.4 PassMark/$ ($4,995 MSRP vs $2,730 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon 6737P better than EPYC 9354P?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, EPYC 9354P is ahead with a 9.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Xeon 6737P pulls ahead with 6.5% better PassMark. EPYC 9354P also has the bigger cache pool with 77.8% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 144 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon 6737P is the better fit. You are getting 6.5% better PassMark, backed by 32 cores and 64 threads.

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

Xeon 6737P is still the faster CPU overall, but EPYC 9354P makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Xeon 6737P is 83.0% more expensive on MSRP at $4,995 MSRP versus $2,730 MSRP, and it gives you 6.5% better PassMark. The trade-off is that EPYC 9354P is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 9.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. EPYC 9354P is also 71.9% better value on MSRP (27.4 vs 15.9 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

Xeon 6737P is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2022) and more multi-core headroom with 32 cores / 64 threads instead of 32/64. 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 9354P Benchmark Check

Xeon 6737P Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9354P	Xeon 6737P
1080p
low	176 FPS	190 FPS
medium	145 FPS	166 FPS
high	125 FPS	132 FPS
ultra	96 FPS	106 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	156 FPS
medium	123 FPS	132 FPS
high	99 FPS	101 FPS
ultra	77 FPS	83 FPS
4K
low	71 FPS	71 FPS
medium	60 FPS	63 FPS
high	47 FPS	49 FPS
ultra	39 FPS	40 FPS

Open EPYC 9354P Open Xeon 6737P

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9354P	Xeon 6737P
1080p
low	534 FPS	520 FPS
medium	466 FPS	460 FPS
high	374 FPS	376 FPS
ultra	304 FPS	309 FPS
1440p
low	439 FPS	425 FPS
medium	392 FPS	383 FPS
high	324 FPS	321 FPS
ultra	255 FPS	256 FPS
4K
low	270 FPS	262 FPS
medium	246 FPS	239 FPS
high	216 FPS	212 FPS
ultra	179 FPS	176 FPS

Open EPYC 9354P Open Xeon 6737P

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9354P	Xeon 6737P
1080p
low	673 FPS	883 FPS
medium	562 FPS	813 FPS
high	523 FPS	768 FPS
ultra	455 FPS	677 FPS
1440p
low	511 FPS	756 FPS
medium	426 FPS	692 FPS
high	390 FPS	650 FPS
ultra	337 FPS	581 FPS
4K
low	377 FPS	510 FPS
medium	295 FPS	429 FPS
high	263 FPS	383 FPS
ultra	211 FPS	318 FPS

Open EPYC 9354P Open Xeon 6737P

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9354P	Xeon 6737P
1080p
low	937 FPS	985 FPS
medium	856 FPS	886 FPS
high	735 FPS	766 FPS
ultra	648 FPS	665 FPS
1440p
low	751 FPS	806 FPS
medium	658 FPS	701 FPS
high	561 FPS	604 FPS
ultra	480 FPS	519 FPS
4K
low	539 FPS	582 FPS
medium	484 FPS	521 FPS
high	423 FPS	462 FPS
ultra	366 FPS	397 FPS

Open EPYC 9354P Open Xeon 6737P

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9354P and Xeon 6737P

EPYC 9354P

The EPYC 9354P 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 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 3.25 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): 280 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 74,808 points. Launch price was $2,730.

Xeon 6737P

The Xeon 6737P is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 February 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Granite Rapids (2024−2025) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 144 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4710. Thermal design power (TDP): 270 Watt. Memory support: DDR5(6400MT/s). Passmark benchmark score: 79,634 points. Launch price was $4,995.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the EPYC 9354P and Xeon 6737P share an identical 32-core/64-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the EPYC 9354P versus 4 GHz on the Xeon 6737P — a 5.1% clock advantage for the Xeon 6737P (base: 3.25 GHz vs 2.9 GHz). The EPYC 9354P uses the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture (5 nm, 6 nm), while the Xeon 6737P uses Granite Rapids (2024−2025) (Intel 3 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9354P scores 74,808 against the Xeon 6737P's 79,634 — a 6.2% lead for the Xeon 6737P. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9354P vs 144 MB (total) on the Xeon 6737P.

Feature	EPYC 9354P	Xeon 6737P
Cores / Threads	32 / 64	32 / 64
Boost Clock	3.8 GHz	4 GHz+5%
Base Clock	3.25 GHz+12%	2.9 GHz
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)+78%	144 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	2 MB (per core)+100%
Process	5 nm, 6 nm	Intel 3 nm-40%
Architecture	Genoa (2022−2023)	Granite Rapids (2024−2025)
PassMark	74,808	79,634+6%
Geekbench 6 Single	—	2,000
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	45,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9354P uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon 6737P uses LGA4710 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 4800 on the EPYC 9354P versus DDR5-6400 on the Xeon 6737P — the EPYC 9354P supports 199.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9354P supports up to 6144 of RAM compared to 4096 GB — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9354P) vs 8 (Xeon 6737P). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9354P) vs 88 (Xeon 6737P) — the EPYC 9354P offers 40 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9354P) and C741 (Xeon 6737P).

Feature	EPYC 9354P	Xeon 6737P
Socket	SP5	LGA4710
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	4800+95900%	DDR5-6400
Max RAM Capacity	6144	4096 GB+69904967%
RAM Channels	12+50%	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+45%	88

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9354P) vs VT-x, VT-d (Xeon 6737P). Primary use case: Xeon 6737P targets High Performance Server. Direct competitor: EPYC 9354P rivals Xeon Platinum 8468; Xeon 6737P rivals EPYC 9005.

Feature	EPYC 9354P	Xeon 6737P
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d, SEV-SNP	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	—	High Performance Server

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9354P launched at $2730 MSRP, while the Xeon 6737P debuted at $4995. On MSRP ($2730 vs $4995), the EPYC 9354P is $2265 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9354P delivers 27.4 pts/$ vs 15.9 pts/$ for the Xeon 6737P — making the EPYC 9354P the 52.9% better value option.