
EPYC 9015
Popular choices:

Xeon Platinum 8260
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 9015
2024Why buy it
- ✅+17.6% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
- ✅+79% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 36 MB).
- ✅Draws 125W instead of 165W, a 40W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA3647 and DDR4.
- ✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 48) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (15,000 vs 18,500).
Xeon Platinum 8260
2019Why buy it
- ✅+23.3% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (1,190 vs 1,400).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (36 MB vs 64 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $400 MSRP, while EPYC 9015 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌32% higher power demand at 165W vs 125W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA3647 with DDR4, while EPYC 9015 moves to SP5 and DDR5.
EPYC 9015
2024Xeon Platinum 8260
2019Why buy it
- ✅+17.6% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
- ✅+79% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 36 MB).
- ✅Draws 125W instead of 165W, a 40W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA3647 and DDR4.
- ✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 48) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Why buy it
- ✅+23.3% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (15,000 vs 18,500).
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (1,190 vs 1,400).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (36 MB vs 64 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $400 MSRP, while EPYC 9015 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌32% higher power demand at 165W vs 125W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA3647 with DDR4, while EPYC 9015 moves to SP5 and DDR5.
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 9015 better than Xeon Platinum 8260?
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 9015 | Xeon Platinum 8260 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 165 FPS | 194 FPS |
| medium | 134 FPS | 158 FPS |
| high | 116 FPS | 127 FPS |
| ultra | 93 FPS | 98 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 148 FPS | 158 FPS |
| medium | 118 FPS | 123 FPS |
| high | 95 FPS | 96 FPS |
| ultra | 77 FPS | 76 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 69 FPS | 72 FPS |
| medium | 58 FPS | 60 FPS |
| high | 46 FPS | 46 FPS |
| ultra | 38 FPS | 38 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | EPYC 9015 | Xeon Platinum 8260 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 494 FPS | 423 FPS |
| medium | 438 FPS | 368 FPS |
| high | 340 FPS | 300 FPS |
| ultra | 293 FPS | 247 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 425 FPS | 365 FPS |
| medium | 380 FPS | 321 FPS |
| high | 307 FPS | 264 FPS |
| ultra | 248 FPS | 210 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 266 FPS | 228 FPS |
| medium | 241 FPS | 202 FPS |
| high | 209 FPS | 178 FPS |
| ultra | 183 FPS | 146 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | EPYC 9015 | Xeon Platinum 8260 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 722 FPS | 768 FPS |
| medium | 604 FPS | 649 FPS |
| high | 549 FPS | 600 FPS |
| ultra | 487 FPS | 530 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 554 FPS | 573 FPS |
| medium | 461 FPS | 467 FPS |
| high | 413 FPS | 425 FPS |
| ultra | 361 FPS | 372 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 395 FPS | 411 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 321 FPS |
| high | 281 FPS | 286 FPS |
| ultra | 228 FPS | 232 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | EPYC 9015 | Xeon Platinum 8260 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 763 FPS | 768 FPS |
| medium | 763 FPS | 768 FPS |
| high | 699 FPS | 753 FPS |
| ultra | 621 FPS | 655 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 690 FPS | 752 FPS |
| medium | 609 FPS | 659 FPS |
| high | 524 FPS | 566 FPS |
| ultra | 454 FPS | 486 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 501 FPS | 542 FPS |
| medium | 451 FPS | 483 FPS |
| high | 397 FPS | 424 FPS |
| ultra | 340 FPS | 366 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9015 and Xeon Platinum 8260

EPYC 9015
EPYC 9015
The EPYC 9015 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 30,505 points. Launch price was $527.

Xeon Platinum 8260
Xeon Platinum 8260
The Xeon Platinum 8260 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 December 2018 (6 years ago). It is based on the Cascade Lake-SP (2018) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 35.75 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 165 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 30,720 points. Launch price was $4,702.
Processing Power
The EPYC 9015 packs 8 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon Platinum 8260 offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the Xeon Platinum 8260 has 16 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.1 GHz on the EPYC 9015 versus 3.9 GHz on the Xeon Platinum 8260 — a 5% clock advantage for the EPYC 9015 (base: 3.6 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The EPYC 9015 uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Xeon Platinum 8260 uses Cascade Lake-SP (2018) (14 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9015 scores 30,505 against the Xeon Platinum 8260's 30,720 — a 0.7% lead for the Xeon Platinum 8260. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 15,000 vs 18,500 (20.9% advantage for the Xeon Platinum 8260). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,400 vs 1,190, a 16.2% lead for the EPYC 9015 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,000 vs 6,946 (45.2% advantage for the EPYC 9015). L3 cache: 64 MB (total) on the EPYC 9015 vs 35.75 MB (total) on the Xeon Platinum 8260.
| Feature | EPYC 9015 | Xeon Platinum 8260 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 8 / 16 | 24 / 48+200% |
| Boost Clock | 4.1 GHz+5% | 3.9 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.6 GHz+50% | 2.4 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 64 MB (total)+79% | 35.75 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | 4 nm-71% | 14 nm |
| Architecture | Turin (2024) | Cascade Lake-SP (2018) |
| PassMark | 30,505 | 30,720 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 15,000 | 18,500+23% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,400+18% | 1,190 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 11,000+58% | 6,946 |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 9015 uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon Platinum 8260 uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6000 on the EPYC 9015 versus DDR4-2933 on the Xeon Platinum 8260 — the EPYC 9015 supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9015 supports up to 4096 GB of RAM compared to 1024 GB — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9015) vs 6 (Xeon Platinum 8260). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9015) vs 48 (Xeon Platinum 8260) — the EPYC 9015 offers 80 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 platform (EPYC 9015) and C621,Lewisburg (Xeon Platinum 8260).
| Feature | EPYC 9015 | Xeon Platinum 8260 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP5 | LGA3647 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+67% | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-6000+25% | DDR4-2933 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4096 GB+300% | 1024 GB |
| RAM Channels | 12+100% | 6 |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128+167% | 48 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9015) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon Platinum 8260). Primary use case: EPYC 9015 targets Next-gen Data Center / AI Workloads, Xeon Platinum 8260 targets Server / Workstation. Direct competitor: EPYC 9015 rivals Xeon 6; Xeon Platinum 8260 rivals Xeon Gold 6248R.
| Feature | EPYC 9015 | Xeon Platinum 8260 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | Yes | Yes |
| Virtualization | AMD-V, SEV-SNP | VT-x, VT-d, EPT |
| Target Use | Next-gen Data Center / AI Workloads | Server / Workstation |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













