
EPYC 9474F
Popular choices:

Xeon 6747P
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 9474F
2022Why buy it
- ✅45.5% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 88) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌4.4% HIGHER MSRP$6,780 MSRPvs$6,497 MSRP
- ❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.
Xeon 6747P
2025Why buy it
- ✅Costs $283 less on MSRP ($6,497 MSRP vs $6,780 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 330W instead of 360W, a 30W reduction.
- ✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (101,685 vs 102,255).
EPYC 9474F
2022Xeon 6747P
2025Why buy it
- ✅45.5% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 88) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Why buy it
- ✅Costs $283 less on MSRP ($6,497 MSRP vs $6,780 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 330W instead of 360W, a 30W reduction.
- ✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.
Trade-offs
- ❌4.4% HIGHER MSRP$6,780 MSRPvs$6,497 MSRP
- ❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (101,685 vs 102,255).
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 9474F better than Xeon 6747P?
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 9474F | Xeon 6747P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 218 FPS | 188 FPS |
| medium | 179 FPS | 165 FPS |
| high | 154 FPS | 131 FPS |
| ultra | 108 FPS | 106 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 189 FPS | 155 FPS |
| medium | 151 FPS | 131 FPS |
| high | 121 FPS | 100 FPS |
| ultra | 86 FPS | 82 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 77 FPS | 70 FPS |
| medium | 64 FPS | 63 FPS |
| high | 50 FPS | 49 FPS |
| ultra | 41 FPS | 40 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | EPYC 9474F | Xeon 6747P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 615 FPS | 520 FPS |
| medium | 537 FPS | 460 FPS |
| high | 433 FPS | 376 FPS |
| ultra | 378 FPS | 309 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 516 FPS | 425 FPS |
| medium | 459 FPS | 383 FPS |
| high | 381 FPS | 321 FPS |
| ultra | 316 FPS | 256 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 320 FPS | 262 FPS |
| medium | 288 FPS | 239 FPS |
| high | 258 FPS | 212 FPS |
| ultra | 232 FPS | 176 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | EPYC 9474F | Xeon 6747P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 787 FPS | 849 FPS |
| medium | 671 FPS | 768 FPS |
| high | 608 FPS | 730 FPS |
| ultra | 534 FPS | 641 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 586 FPS | 737 FPS |
| medium | 497 FPS | 662 FPS |
| high | 443 FPS | 626 FPS |
| ultra | 384 FPS | 558 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 423 FPS | 493 FPS |
| medium | 339 FPS | 402 FPS |
| high | 299 FPS | 364 FPS |
| ultra | 240 FPS | 303 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | EPYC 9474F | Xeon 6747P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 1075 FPS | 1034 FPS |
| medium | 974 FPS | 916 FPS |
| high | 829 FPS | 789 FPS |
| ultra | 732 FPS | 670 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 819 FPS | 848 FPS |
| medium | 717 FPS | 727 FPS |
| high | 607 FPS | 623 FPS |
| ultra | 521 FPS | 525 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 592 FPS | 613 FPS |
| medium | 531 FPS | 538 FPS |
| high | 461 FPS | 474 FPS |
| ultra | 393 FPS | 403 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9474F and Xeon 6747P

EPYC 9474F
EPYC 9474F
The EPYC 9474F 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 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 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): 360 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 102,255 points. Launch price was $6,780.

Xeon 6747P
Xeon 6747P
The Xeon 6747P 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 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 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): 330 Watt. Memory support: DDR5(6400MT/s), MRDIMM(8800MT/s). Passmark benchmark score: 101,685 points. Launch price was $6,497.
Processing Power
Both the EPYC 9474F and Xeon 6747P share an identical 48-core/96-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.1 GHz on the EPYC 9474F versus 3.9 GHz on the Xeon 6747P — a 5% clock advantage for the EPYC 9474F (base: 3.6 GHz vs 2.7 GHz). The EPYC 9474F uses the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture (5 nm, 6 nm), while the Xeon 6747P uses Granite Rapids (2024−2025) (Intel 3 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9474F scores 102,255 against the Xeon 6747P's 101,685 — a 0.6% lead for the EPYC 9474F. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9474F vs 288 MB (total) on the Xeon 6747P.
| Feature | EPYC 9474F | Xeon 6747P |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 48 / 96 | 48 / 96 |
| Boost Clock | 4.1 GHz+5% | 3.9 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.6 GHz+33% | 2.7 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 | 102,255 | 101,685 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 2,000 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 45,000 |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 9474F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon 6747P uses LGA4710 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-4800 memory speed. The Xeon 6747P supports up to 4096 GB of RAM compared to 6 TB — 199.4% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9474F) vs 8 (Xeon 6747P). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9474F) vs 88 (Xeon 6747P) — the EPYC 9474F offers 40 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9474F) and C741 (Xeon 6747P).
| Feature | EPYC 9474F | Xeon 6747P |
|---|---|---|
| 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% | 4096 GB |
| RAM Channels | 12+50% | 8 |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128+45% | 88 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization support: AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9474F) vs VT-x, VT-d (Xeon 6747P). Primary use case: EPYC 9474F targets Data Center / Performance Optimized, Xeon 6747P targets High Performance Server. Direct competitor: EPYC 9474F rivals Xeon 8461V; Xeon 6747P rivals EPYC 9555.
| Feature | EPYC 9474F | Xeon 6747P |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | — | None |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | Yes |
| Virtualization | AMD-V, SEV-SNP | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | Data Center / Performance Optimized | High Performance Server |
Value Analysis
The EPYC 9474F launched at $6780 MSRP, while the Xeon 6747P debuted at $6497. On MSRP ($6780 vs $6497), the Xeon 6747P is $283 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9474F delivers 15.1 pts/$ vs 15.7 pts/$ for the Xeon 6747P — making the Xeon 6747P the 3.7% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 9474F | Xeon 6747P |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $6780 | $6497-4% |
| Performance per Dollar | 15.1 | 15.7+4% |
| Release Date | 2022 | 2025 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













