
EPYC 9454P
Popular choices:

Xeon 6740P
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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 9454P
2022Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +4.6% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $52 less on MSRP ($4,598 MSRP vs $4,650 MSRP).
- ✅45.5% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 88) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.
Xeon 6740P
2025Why buy it
- ✅Draws 270W instead of 290W, a 20W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9454P across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (90,684 vs 94,686).
- ❌1.1% HIGHER MSRP$4,650 MSRPvs$4,598 MSRP
EPYC 9454P
2022Xeon 6740P
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +4.6% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $52 less on MSRP ($4,598 MSRP vs $4,650 MSRP).
- ✅45.5% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 88) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Why buy it
- ✅Draws 270W instead of 290W, a 20W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9454P across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (90,684 vs 94,686).
- ❌1.1% HIGHER MSRP$4,650 MSRPvs$4,598 MSRP
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 9454P better than Xeon 6740P?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | EPYC 9454P | Xeon 6740P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 171 FPS | 187 FPS |
| medium | 142 FPS | 165 FPS |
| high | 122 FPS | 131 FPS |
| ultra | 96 FPS | 106 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 149 FPS | 155 FPS |
| medium | 120 FPS | 131 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 100 FPS |
| ultra | 77 FPS | 82 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 70 FPS | 70 FPS |
| medium | 60 FPS | 63 FPS |
| high | 47 FPS | 49 FPS |
| ultra | 39 FPS | 40 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | EPYC 9454P | Xeon 6740P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 533 FPS | 285 FPS |
| medium | 465 FPS | 252 FPS |
| high | 373 FPS | 208 FPS |
| ultra | 303 FPS | 171 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 438 FPS | 233 FPS |
| medium | 392 FPS | 210 FPS |
| high | 323 FPS | 178 FPS |
| ultra | 255 FPS | 142 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 270 FPS | 144 FPS |
| medium | 246 FPS | 133 FPS |
| high | 216 FPS | 120 FPS |
| ultra | 179 FPS | 100 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | EPYC 9454P | Xeon 6740P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 672 FPS | 849 FPS |
| medium | 561 FPS | 768 FPS |
| high | 522 FPS | 730 FPS |
| ultra | 455 FPS | 641 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 511 FPS | 737 FPS |
| medium | 426 FPS | 662 FPS |
| high | 390 FPS | 626 FPS |
| ultra | 337 FPS | 558 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 377 FPS | 493 FPS |
| medium | 294 FPS | 402 FPS |
| high | 263 FPS | 364 FPS |
| ultra | 211 FPS | 303 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | EPYC 9454P | Xeon 6740P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 902 FPS | 1097 FPS |
| medium | 822 FPS | 978 FPS |
| high | 708 FPS | 834 FPS |
| ultra | 625 FPS | 702 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 724 FPS | 902 FPS |
| medium | 631 FPS | 777 FPS |
| high | 540 FPS | 660 FPS |
| ultra | 462 FPS | 551 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 519 FPS | 656 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 577 FPS |
| high | 407 FPS | 505 FPS |
| ultra | 350 FPS | 425 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9454P and Xeon 6740P

EPYC 9454P
EPYC 9454P
The EPYC 9454P 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: 94,686 points. Launch price was $4,598.

Xeon 6740P
Xeon 6740P
The Xeon 6740P 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 48 cores and 96 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 288 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: 90,684 points. Launch price was $4,650.
Processing Power
Both the EPYC 9454P and Xeon 6740P share an identical 48-core/96-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the EPYC 9454P versus 3.8 GHz on the Xeon 6740P — identical boost frequencies (base: 2.75 GHz vs 2.1 GHz). The EPYC 9454P uses the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture (5 nm, 6 nm), while the Xeon 6740P uses Granite Rapids (2024−2025) (Intel 3 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9454P scores 94,686 against the Xeon 6740P's 90,684 — a 4.3% lead for the EPYC 9454P. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9454P vs 288 MB (total) on the Xeon 6740P.
| Feature | EPYC 9454P | Xeon 6740P |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 48 / 96 | 48 / 96 |
| Boost Clock | 3.8 GHz | 3.8 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.75 GHz+31% | 2.1 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 256 MB (total) | 288 MB (total)+13% |
| 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 | 94,686+4% | 90,684 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,923 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 18,576 | — |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 9454P uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon 6740P uses LGA4710 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-4800 memory speed. The EPYC 9454P supports up to 6 TB of RAM compared to 4 TB — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9454P) vs 8 (Xeon 6740P). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9454P) vs 88 (Xeon 6740P) — the EPYC 9454P offers 40 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.
| Feature | EPYC 9454P | Xeon 6740P |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP5 | LGA4710 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800 | DDR5-6400 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 6 TB+50% | 4 TB |
| RAM Channels | 12+50% | 8 |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128+45% | 88 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization support: AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9454P) vs VT-x, VT-d, VT-x EPT (Xeon 6740P). Primary use case: EPYC 9454P targets Data Center / Single Socket, Xeon 6740P targets High-density Compute. Direct competitor: EPYC 9454P rivals Xeon 8468; Xeon 6740P rivals EPYC 9355P.
| Feature | EPYC 9454P | Xeon 6740P |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V, SEV-SNP | VT-x, VT-d, VT-x EPT |
| Target Use | Data Center / Single Socket | High-density Compute |
Value Analysis
The EPYC 9454P launched at $4598 MSRP, while the Xeon 6740P debuted at $4650. On MSRP ($4598 vs $4650), the EPYC 9454P is $52 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9454P delivers 20.6 pts/$ vs 19.5 pts/$ for the Xeon 6740P — making the EPYC 9454P the 5.4% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 9454P | Xeon 6740P |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $4598-1% | $4650 |
| Performance per Dollar | 20.6+6% | 19.5 |
| Release Date | 2022 | 2025 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













