EPYC 7262 vs Xeon E5-2697 v4

EPYC 7262 vs Xeon E5-2697 v4 Performance Spectrum

EPYC 7262

8 / 16

20,779

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Xeon E5-2697 v4

18 / 36

20,990

+1.0%

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 7262 vs Xeon E5-2697 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 7262 vs Xeon E5-2697 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 7262

2019

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-2697 v4 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (20,779 vs 20,990).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (32 MB vs 45 MB).

Xeon E5-2697 v4

2016

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +11.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+40.6% larger total L3 cache (45 MB vs 32 MB).
✅Draws 145W instead of 155W, a 10W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E5-2697 v4 better than EPYC 7262?

Yes. Xeon E5-2697 v4 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 11.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 1% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Xeon E5-2697 v4 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 11.2% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E5-2697 v4 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 18 cores and 36 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 40.6% larger total L3 cache (45 MB vs 32 MB).

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

Xeon E5-2697 v4 still makes the most sense overall. Xeon E5-2697 v4 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 11.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

EPYC 7262 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2016). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

EPYC 7262 vs Xeon E5-2697 v4 Technical Specifications

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

EPYC 7262

The EPYC 7262 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 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 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): 155 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 20,779 points. Launch price was $575.

Xeon E5-2697 v4

The Xeon E5-2697 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 18 cores and 36 threads. Base frequency is 2.3 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 45 MB. L2 cache: 4.5 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 145 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 20,990 points. Launch price was $2,702.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 7262 packs 8 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon E5-2697 v4 offers 18 cores / 36 threads — the Xeon E5-2697 v4 has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.4 GHz on the EPYC 7262 versus 3.6 GHz on the Xeon E5-2697 v4 — a 5.7% clock advantage for the Xeon E5-2697 v4 (base: 3.2 GHz vs 2.3 GHz). The EPYC 7262 uses the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture (7 nm, 14 nm), while the Xeon E5-2697 v4 uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7262 scores 20,779 against the Xeon E5-2697 v4's 20,990 — a 1% lead for the Xeon E5-2697 v4. L3 cache: 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 7262 vs 45 MB on the Xeon E5-2697 v4.

Feature	EPYC 7262	Xeon E5-2697 v4
Cores / Threads	8 / 16	18 / 36+125%
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz	3.6 GHz+6%
Base Clock	3.2 GHz+39%	2.3 GHz
L3 Cache	32 MB (total)	45 MB+41%
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	4.5 MB+800%
Process	7 nm, 14 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Zen 2 (2017−2020)	Broadwell (2015−2019)
PassMark	20,779	20,990+1%
Cinebench R23 Multi	11,500	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,346	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	7,900	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 7262 uses the SP3 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon E5-2697 v4 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	EPYC 7262	Xeon E5-2697 v4
Socket	SP3	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0+33%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-3200	—
Max RAM Capacity	4096 GB	—
RAM Channels	8	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	128	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V, SEV (EPYC 7262) / not specified (Xeon E5-2697 v4). Primary use case: EPYC 7262 targets Budget Server / Multi-thread computing. Direct competitor: EPYC 7262 rivals Xeon Silver 4216.