EPYC 7252 vs Xeon Gold 6137

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 7252

2019

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.
✅+28% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 25 MB).
✅Draws 120W instead of 205W, a 85W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon Gold 6137 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Xeon Gold 6137

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +16.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (19,365 vs 19,411).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (25 MB vs 32 MB).
❌70.8% higher power demand at 205W vs 120W.

EPYC 7252

2019

Xeon Gold 6137

2017

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.
✅+28% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 25 MB).
✅Draws 120W instead of 205W, a 85W reduction.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +16.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon Gold 6137 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (19,365 vs 19,411).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (25 MB vs 32 MB).
❌70.8% higher power demand at 205W vs 120W.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 7252 better than Xeon Gold 6137?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Xeon Gold 6137 is ahead with a 16.1% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 7252 pulls ahead with 0.2% better PassMark. EPYC 7252 also has the bigger cache pool with 28% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 25 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 7252 is the better fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 28% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 25 MB).

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

EPYC 7252 still looks like the safer overall buy. EPYC 7252 is at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you 0.2% better PassMark.

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

EPYC 7252 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2017), 28% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 25 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 8/16. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

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 7252 Benchmark Check

Xeon Gold 6137 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 7252	Xeon Gold 6137
1080p
low	148 FPS	186 FPS
medium	121 FPS	147 FPS
high	103 FPS	120 FPS
ultra	83 FPS	96 FPS
1440p
low	129 FPS	150 FPS
medium	103 FPS	116 FPS
high	84 FPS	93 FPS
ultra	67 FPS	74 FPS
4K
low	62 FPS	69 FPS
medium	53 FPS	57 FPS
high	42 FPS	45 FPS
ultra	33 FPS	36 FPS

Open EPYC 7252 Open Xeon Gold 6137

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 7252	Xeon Gold 6137
1080p
low	354 FPS	460 FPS
medium	312 FPS	396 FPS
high	261 FPS	336 FPS
ultra	213 FPS	304 FPS
1440p
low	300 FPS	408 FPS
medium	274 FPS	358 FPS
high	234 FPS	305 FPS
ultra	188 FPS	267 FPS
4K
low	194 FPS	267 FPS
medium	178 FPS	235 FPS
high	153 FPS	215 FPS
ultra	123 FPS	191 FPS

Open EPYC 7252 Open Xeon Gold 6137

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 7252	Xeon Gold 6137
1080p
low	485 FPS	484 FPS
medium	485 FPS	484 FPS
high	453 FPS	484 FPS
ultra	397 FPS	484 FPS
1440p
low	485 FPS	484 FPS
medium	395 FPS	484 FPS
high	346 FPS	459 FPS
ultra	300 FPS	397 FPS
4K
low	355 FPS	441 FPS
medium	277 FPS	350 FPS
high	236 FPS	309 FPS
ultra	190 FPS	248 FPS

Open EPYC 7252 Open Xeon Gold 6137

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 7252	Xeon Gold 6137
1080p
low	485 FPS	484 FPS
medium	485 FPS	484 FPS
high	485 FPS	484 FPS
ultra	485 FPS	484 FPS
1440p
low	485 FPS	484 FPS
medium	485 FPS	484 FPS
high	473 FPS	484 FPS
ultra	404 FPS	484 FPS
4K
low	427 FPS	484 FPS
medium	386 FPS	457 FPS
high	345 FPS	409 FPS
ultra	298 FPS	354 FPS

Open EPYC 7252 Open Xeon Gold 6137

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 7252 and Xeon Gold 6137

EPYC 7252

The EPYC 7252 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 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm, 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 120 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 19,411 points. Launch price was $475.

Xeon Gold 6137

The Xeon Gold 6137 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.9 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 GHz. L3 cache: 25 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 205 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 19,365 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the EPYC 7252 and Xeon Gold 6137 share an identical 8-core/16-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the EPYC 7252 versus 4.1 GHz on the Xeon Gold 6137 — a 24.7% clock advantage for the Xeon Gold 6137 (base: 3.1 GHz vs 3.9 GHz). The EPYC 7252 is built on the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture. In PassMark, the EPYC 7252 scores 19,411 against the Xeon Gold 6137's 19,365 — a 0.2% lead for the EPYC 7252. L3 cache: 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 7252 vs 25 MB on the Xeon Gold 6137.

Feature	EPYC 7252	Xeon Gold 6137
Cores / Threads	8 / 16	8 / 16
Boost Clock	3.2 GHz	4.1 GHz+28%
Base Clock	3.1 GHz	3.9 GHz+26%
L3 Cache	32 MB (total)+28%	25 MB
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	—
Process	7 nm, 14 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Zen 2 (2017−2020)	—
PassMark	19,411	19,365

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 7252 uses the SP3 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon Gold 6137 uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.