EPYC 7252 vs Xeon E5-2690 v4

EPYC 7252 vs Xeon E5-2690 v4 Performance Spectrum

EPYC 7252

8 / 16

19,411

+0.8%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Xeon E5-2690 v4

14 / 28

19,255

0.0%

Core i7-6800K

Core i7-3970X Extreme Edition

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.

EPYC 7252 vs Xeon E5-2690 v4 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

EPYC 7252 vs Xeon E5-2690 v4: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

EPYC 7252

2019

Why buy it

✅+0.8% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 120W instead of 135W, a 15W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-2690 v4 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Xeon E5-2690 v4

2016

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (19,255 vs 19,411).
❌Launch MSRP is still $2,090 MSRP, while EPYC 7252 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 7252 better than Xeon E5-2690 v4?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Xeon E5-2690 v4 is ahead with a 7.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 7252 pulls ahead with 0.8% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 7252 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads.

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

EPYC 7252 is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon E5-2690 v4 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. EPYC 7252 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $2,090 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.8% better PassMark. The compromise is that Xeon E5-2690 v4 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 7.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Xeon E5-2690 v4 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (9.2 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

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

EPYC 7252 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2016) and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 14/28. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

EPYC 7252 vs Xeon E5-2690 v4 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

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 E5-2690 v4

The Xeon E5-2690 v4 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 June 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture. It features 14 cores and 28 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 35 MB. L2 cache: 3.5 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 135 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 19,255 points. Launch price was $2,090.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 7252 packs 8 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon E5-2690 v4 offers 14 cores / 28 threads — the Xeon E5-2690 v4 has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the EPYC 7252 versus 3.5 GHz on the Xeon E5-2690 v4 — a 9% clock advantage for the Xeon E5-2690 v4 (base: 3.1 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The EPYC 7252 uses the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture (7 nm, 14 nm), while the Xeon E5-2690 v4 uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7252 scores 19,411 against the Xeon E5-2690 v4's 19,255 — a 0.8% lead for the EPYC 7252. L3 cache: 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 7252 vs 35 MB on the Xeon E5-2690 v4.

Feature	EPYC 7252	Xeon E5-2690 v4
Cores / Threads	8 / 16	14 / 28+75%
Boost Clock	3.2 GHz	3.5 GHz+9%
Base Clock	3.1 GHz+19%	2.6 GHz
L3 Cache	32 MB (total)	35 MB+9%
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	3.5 MB+600%
Process	7 nm, 14 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Zen 2 (2017−2020)	Broadwell (2015−2019)
PassMark	19,411	19,255

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 7252 uses the SP3 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon E5-2690 v4 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.