EPYC 8024P vs Xeon D-1747NTE

EPYC 8024P vs Xeon D-1747NTE Performance Spectrum

EPYC 8024P

8 / 16

20,455

+0.9%

Ryzen Threadripper 3960X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Xeon D-1747NTE

10 / 20

20,279

0.0%

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 8024P vs Xeon D-1747NTE 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 8024P vs Xeon D-1747NTE: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

EPYC 8024P

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+113.3% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 15 MB).
✅Newer platform on SP6 with DDR5 support instead of FCBGA2227 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

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

Xeon D-1747NTE

2022

Why buy it

✅Draws 80W instead of 90W, a 10W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 8024P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (20,279 vs 20,455).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (15 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Older platform position on FCBGA2227 with DDR4, while EPYC 8024P moves to SP6 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 8024P better than Xeon D-1747NTE?

Yes. EPYC 8024P is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 7.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.9% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, EPYC 8024P is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 7.2% 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, EPYC 8024P is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.9% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 113.3% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 15 MB).

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

EPYC 8024P still makes the most sense overall. EPYC 8024P comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 7.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

EPYC 8024P makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2022), a healthier platform with SP6 and DDR5 instead of FCBGA2227, 113.3% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 15 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 10/20. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

EPYC 8024P vs Xeon D-1747NTE Technical Specifications

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

EPYC 8024P

The EPYC 8024P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 18 September 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Siena (2023−2024) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: SP6. Thermal design power (TDP): 90 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 20,455 points. Launch price was $409.

Xeon D-1747NTE

The Xeon D-1747NTE is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It features 10 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 15 MB. Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2227. Thermal design power (TDP): 80 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 20,279 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 8024P packs 8 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon D-1747NTE offers 10 cores / 20 threads — the Xeon D-1747NTE has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3 GHz on the EPYC 8024P versus 3.5 GHz on the Xeon D-1747NTE — a 15.4% clock advantage for the Xeon D-1747NTE (base: 2.4 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The EPYC 8024P is built on the Siena (2023−2024) architecture. In PassMark, the EPYC 8024P scores 20,455 against the Xeon D-1747NTE's 20,279 — a 0.9% lead for the EPYC 8024P. L3 cache: 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 8024P vs 15 MB on the Xeon D-1747NTE.

Feature	EPYC 8024P	Xeon D-1747NTE
Cores / Threads	8 / 16	10 / 20+25%
Boost Clock	3 GHz	3.5 GHz+17%
Base Clock	2.4 GHz	2.5 GHz+4%
L3 Cache	32 MB (total)+113%	15 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	—
Process	5 nm-50%	10 nm
Architecture	Siena (2023−2024)	—
PassMark	20,455	20,279

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 8024P uses the SP6 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon D-1747NTE uses FCBGA2227 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.