EPYC 9454 vs Xeon Platinum 8470

CPU

GPU

EPYC 9454

48 Cores96 Thrd290 WWMax: 3.8 GHz2022

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Xeon Platinum 8470

52 Cores104 Thrd350 WWMax: 3.8 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

EPYC 9454

48 / 96

87,961

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5955WX

Ryzen 9 7945HX3D

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7970X

Ryzen Threadripper 9970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7980X

Xeon Platinum 8470

52 / 104

89,850

+2.1%

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 9454

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.5% higher average FPS across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+143.8% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 105 MB).
✅Costs $4,134 less on MSRP ($5,225 MSRP vs $9,359 MSRP).
✅Delivers 75.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 16.8 vs 9.6 PassMark/$ ($5,225 MSRP vs $9,359 MSRP).
✅Draws 290W instead of 350W, a 60W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (87,961 vs 89,850).

Xeon Platinum 8470

2023

Why buy it

✅+2.1% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9454 across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (105 MB vs 256 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 9.6 vs 16.8 PassMark/$ ($9,359 MSRP vs $5,225 MSRP).
❌20.7% higher power demand at 350W vs 290W.

EPYC 9454

2022

Xeon Platinum 8470

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.5% higher average FPS across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+143.8% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 105 MB).
✅Costs $4,134 less on MSRP ($5,225 MSRP vs $9,359 MSRP).
✅Delivers 75.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 16.8 vs 9.6 PassMark/$ ($5,225 MSRP vs $9,359 MSRP).
✅Draws 290W instead of 350W, a 60W reduction.

Why buy it

✅+2.1% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (87,961 vs 89,850).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9454 across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (105 MB vs 256 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 9.6 vs 16.8 PassMark/$ ($9,359 MSRP vs $5,225 MSRP).
❌20.7% higher power demand at 350W vs 290W.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9454 better than Xeon Platinum 8470?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, EPYC 9454 is ahead with a 3.5% average FPS lead across 49 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Xeon Platinum 8470 pulls ahead with 2.1% better PassMark. EPYC 9454 also has the bigger cache pool with 143.8% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 105 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon Platinum 8470 is the better fit. You are getting 2.1% better PassMark, backed by 52 cores and 104 threads.

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

EPYC 9454 is the smarter buy today. EPYC 9454 is $4,134 cheaper on MSRP at $5,225 MSRP versus $9,359 MSRP, and it gives you a 3.5% average FPS lead across 49 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Xeon Platinum 8470 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 2.1% better PassMark. It is also 75.4% better value on MSRP (16.8 vs 9.6 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

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

Xeon Platinum 8470 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2022) and more multi-core headroom with 52 cores / 104 threads instead of 48/96. That extra cache should hold up really well in CPU-limited games and high-refresh builds.

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 9454 Benchmark Check

Xeon Platinum 8470 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9454	Xeon Platinum 8470
1080p
low	171 FPS	191 FPS
medium	142 FPS	172 FPS
high	122 FPS	140 FPS
ultra	96 FPS	114 FPS
1440p
low	149 FPS	156 FPS
medium	120 FPS	132 FPS
high	97 FPS	102 FPS
ultra	77 FPS	84 FPS
4K
low	70 FPS	71 FPS
medium	60 FPS	64 FPS
high	47 FPS	49 FPS
ultra	39 FPS	40 FPS

Open EPYC 9454 Open Xeon Platinum 8470

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9454	Xeon Platinum 8470
1080p
low	533 FPS	282 FPS
medium	465 FPS	250 FPS
high	373 FPS	206 FPS
ultra	303 FPS	169 FPS
1440p
low	438 FPS	230 FPS
medium	392 FPS	208 FPS
high	323 FPS	177 FPS
ultra	255 FPS	141 FPS
4K
low	270 FPS	143 FPS
medium	246 FPS	131 FPS
high	216 FPS	119 FPS
ultra	179 FPS	99 FPS

Open EPYC 9454 Open Xeon Platinum 8470

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9454	Xeon Platinum 8470
1080p
low	672 FPS	854 FPS
medium	561 FPS	773 FPS
high	522 FPS	738 FPS
ultra	455 FPS	649 FPS
1440p
low	511 FPS	760 FPS
medium	426 FPS	683 FPS
high	390 FPS	637 FPS
ultra	337 FPS	569 FPS
4K
low	377 FPS	505 FPS
medium	294 FPS	413 FPS
high	263 FPS	368 FPS
ultra	211 FPS	306 FPS

Open EPYC 9454 Open Xeon Platinum 8470

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9454	Xeon Platinum 8470
1080p
low	902 FPS	983 FPS
medium	822 FPS	885 FPS
high	708 FPS	765 FPS
ultra	625 FPS	662 FPS
1440p
low	724 FPS	804 FPS
medium	631 FPS	700 FPS
high	540 FPS	603 FPS
ultra	462 FPS	516 FPS
4K
low	519 FPS	577 FPS
medium	464 FPS	518 FPS
high	407 FPS	459 FPS
ultra	350 FPS	397 FPS

Open EPYC 9454 Open Xeon Platinum 8470

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9454 and Xeon Platinum 8470

EPYC 9454

The EPYC 9454 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: 87,961 points. Launch price was $5,225.

Xeon Platinum 8470

The Xeon Platinum 8470 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 10 January 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) architecture. It features 52 cores and 104 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 105 MB. L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4677. Thermal design power (TDP): 350 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800, DDR5-4400. Passmark benchmark score: 89,850 points. Launch price was $9,359.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9454 packs 48 cores / 96 threads, while the Xeon Platinum 8470 offers 52 cores / 104 threads — the Xeon Platinum 8470 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the EPYC 9454 versus 3.8 GHz on the Xeon Platinum 8470 — identical boost frequencies (base: 2.75 GHz vs 2 GHz). The EPYC 9454 uses the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture (5 nm, 6 nm), while the Xeon Platinum 8470 uses Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9454 scores 87,961 against the Xeon Platinum 8470's 89,850 — a 2.1% lead for the Xeon Platinum 8470. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9454 vs 105 MB on the Xeon Platinum 8470.

Feature	EPYC 9454	Xeon Platinum 8470
Cores / Threads	48 / 96	52 / 104+8%
Boost Clock	3.8 GHz	3.8 GHz
Base Clock	2.75 GHz+38%	2 GHz
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)+144%	105 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	2 MB (per core)+100%
Process	5 nm, 6 nm-29%	Intel 7 nm
Architecture	Genoa (2022−2023)	Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024)
PassMark	87,961	89,850+2%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9454 uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon Platinum 8470 uses LGA4677 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-4800 memory speed. The EPYC 9454 supports up to 6 TB of RAM compared to 4 TB — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9454) vs 8 (Xeon Platinum 8470). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9454) vs 80 (Xeon Platinum 8470) — the EPYC 9454 offers 48 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	EPYC 9454	Xeon Platinum 8470
Socket	SP5	LGA4677
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800	DDR5-4800
Max RAM Capacity	6 TB+50%	4 TB
RAM Channels	12+50%	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+60%	80

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9454) vs VT-x, VT-d, VT-x EPT (Xeon Platinum 8470). Primary use case: EPYC 9454 targets Data Center, Xeon Platinum 8470 targets Cloud Infrastructure. Direct competitor: EPYC 9454 rivals Xeon Platinum 8468; Xeon Platinum 8470 rivals EPYC 9534.

Feature	EPYC 9454	Xeon Platinum 8470
Integrated GPU	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V, SEV-SNP	VT-x, VT-d, VT-x EPT
Target Use	Data Center	Cloud Infrastructure

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9454 launched at $5225 MSRP, while the Xeon Platinum 8470 debuted at $9359. On MSRP ($5225 vs $9359), the EPYC 9454 is $4134 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9454 delivers 16.8 pts/$ vs 9.6 pts/$ for the Xeon Platinum 8470 — making the EPYC 9454 the 54.7% better value option.