EPYC 9534
Popular choices:
Xeon Platinum 8368
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 9534
2022Why buy it
- ✅+349.1% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 57 MB).
- ✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA4189 and DDR4.
- ✅100% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 64) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon Platinum 8368 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (15,500 vs 25,000).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.1 vs 12.8 PassMark/$ ($8,803 MSRP vs $7,214 MSRP).
Xeon Platinum 8368
2021Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +10.4% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $1,589 less on MSRP ($7,214 MSRP vs $8,803 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 26.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 12.8 vs 10.1 PassMark/$ ($7,214 MSRP vs $8,803 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 270W instead of 280W, a 10W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (57 MB vs 256 MB).
- ❌Older platform position on LGA4189 with DDR4, while EPYC 9534 moves to SP5 and DDR5.
EPYC 9534
2022Xeon Platinum 8368
2021Why buy it
- ✅+349.1% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 57 MB).
- ✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA4189 and DDR4.
- ✅100% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 64) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +10.4% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $1,589 less on MSRP ($7,214 MSRP vs $8,803 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 26.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 12.8 vs 10.1 PassMark/$ ($7,214 MSRP vs $8,803 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 270W instead of 280W, a 10W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon Platinum 8368 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (15,500 vs 25,000).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.1 vs 12.8 PassMark/$ ($8,803 MSRP vs $7,214 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (57 MB vs 256 MB).
- ❌Older platform position on LGA4189 with DDR4, while EPYC 9534 moves to SP5 and DDR5.
Quick Answers
So, is Xeon Platinum 8368 better than EPYC 9534?
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 9534 | Xeon Platinum 8368 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 170 FPS | 185 FPS |
| medium | 141 FPS | 149 FPS |
| high | 122 FPS | 120 FPS |
| ultra | 96 FPS | 94 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 148 FPS | 154 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 120 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 93 FPS |
| ultra | 77 FPS | 74 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 70 FPS | 72 FPS |
| medium | 59 FPS | 60 FPS |
| high | 47 FPS | 46 FPS |
| ultra | 39 FPS | 38 FPS |
Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | EPYC 9534 | Xeon Platinum 8368 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 524 FPS | 412 FPS |
| medium | 457 FPS | 361 FPS |
| high | 365 FPS | 294 FPS |
| ultra | 296 FPS | 235 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 431 FPS | 353 FPS |
| medium | 385 FPS | 314 FPS |
| high | 317 FPS | 264 FPS |
| ultra | 250 FPS | 203 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 265 FPS | 219 FPS |
| medium | 241 FPS | 198 FPS |
| high | 211 FPS | 167 FPS |
| ultra | 176 FPS | 135 FPS |
League of Legends
| Preset | EPYC 9534 | Xeon Platinum 8368 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 671 FPS | 935 FPS |
| medium | 560 FPS | 817 FPS |
| high | 522 FPS | 766 FPS |
| ultra | 454 FPS | 680 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 511 FPS | 746 FPS |
| medium | 425 FPS | 643 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 603 FPS |
| ultra | 337 FPS | 535 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 376 FPS | 479 FPS |
| medium | 293 FPS | 378 FPS |
| high | 262 FPS | 334 FPS |
| ultra | 210 FPS | 272 FPS |
Valorant
| Preset | EPYC 9534 | Xeon Platinum 8368 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 902 FPS | 911 FPS |
| medium | 822 FPS | 828 FPS |
| high | 708 FPS | 714 FPS |
| ultra | 623 FPS | 613 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 724 FPS | 712 FPS |
| medium | 631 FPS | 625 FPS |
| high | 540 FPS | 537 FPS |
| ultra | 461 FPS | 460 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 519 FPS | 514 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 459 FPS |
| high | 407 FPS | 403 FPS |
| ultra | 350 FPS | 351 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9534 and Xeon Platinum 8368
EPYC 9534
EPYC 9534
The EPYC 9534 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 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 2.45 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 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: 89,077 points. Launch price was $8,803.
Xeon Platinum 8368
Xeon Platinum 8368
The Xeon Platinum 8368 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2021-04-06. It is based on the Ice Lake-SP (2021) architecture. It features 38 cores and 76 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 57 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4189. Thermal design power (TDP): 270 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 92,054 points. Launch price was $7,214.
Processing Power
The EPYC 9534 packs 64 cores / 128 threads, while the Xeon Platinum 8368 offers 38 cores / 76 threads — the EPYC 9534 has 26 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the EPYC 9534 versus 3.4 GHz on the Xeon Platinum 8368 — a 8.5% clock advantage for the EPYC 9534 (base: 2.45 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The EPYC 9534 uses the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture (5 nm, 6 nm), while the Xeon Platinum 8368 uses Ice Lake-SP (2021) (10 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9534 scores 89,077 against the Xeon Platinum 8368's 92,054 — a 3.3% lead for the Xeon Platinum 8368. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,650 vs 1,961, a 17.2% lead for the Xeon Platinum 8368 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 15,500 vs 25,000 (46.9% advantage for the Xeon Platinum 8368). L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9534 vs 57 MB (total) on the Xeon Platinum 8368.
| Feature | EPYC 9534 | Xeon Platinum 8368 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 64 / 128+68% | 38 / 76 |
| Boost Clock | 3.7 GHz+9% | 3.4 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.45 GHz+2% | 2.4 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 256 MB (total)+349% | 57 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | 5 nm, 6 nm-50% | 10 nm |
| Architecture | Genoa (2022−2023) | Ice Lake-SP (2021) |
| PassMark | 89,077 | 92,054+3% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 20,000 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,650 | 1,961+19% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 15,500 | 25,000+61% |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 9534 uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon Platinum 8368 uses LGA4189 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800 on the EPYC 9534 versus DDR4-3200 on the Xeon Platinum 8368 — the EPYC 9534 supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9534 supports up to 6144 GB of RAM compared to 6 TB — 199.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9534) vs 8 (Xeon Platinum 8368). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9534) vs 64 (Xeon Platinum 8368) — the EPYC 9534 offers 64 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9534) and C621A (Xeon Platinum 8368).
| Feature | EPYC 9534 | Xeon Platinum 8368 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP5 | LGA4189 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800+25% | DDR4-3200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 6144 GB | 6 TB |
| RAM Channels | 12+50% | 8 |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128+100% | 64 |
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 9534) vs VT-x, VT-d (Xeon Platinum 8368). Primary use case: EPYC 9534 targets Server, Xeon Platinum 8368 targets Server. Direct competitor: EPYC 9534 rivals Xeon Platinum 8470; Xeon Platinum 8368 rivals EPYC 7543.
| Feature | EPYC 9534 | Xeon Platinum 8368 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | None | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | Yes | Yes |
| Virtualization | AMD-V, SEV-SNP | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | Server | Server |
Value Analysis
The EPYC 9534 launched at $8803 MSRP, while the Xeon Platinum 8368 debuted at $7214. On MSRP ($8803 vs $7214), the Xeon Platinum 8368 is $1589 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9534 delivers 10.1 pts/$ vs 12.8 pts/$ for the Xeon Platinum 8368 — making the Xeon Platinum 8368 the 23.1% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 9534 | Xeon Platinum 8368 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $8803 | $7214-18% |
| Performance per Dollar | 10.1 | 12.8+27% |
| Release Date | 2022 | 2021 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on EPYC 9534 and Xeon Platinum 8368
