EPYC 9115 vs Xeon 6517P

EPYC 9115 vs Xeon 6517P Performance Spectrum

EPYC 9115

16 / 32

48,343

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

Xeon 6517P

16 / 32

48,810

+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 9115 vs Xeon 6517P 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 9115 vs Xeon 6517P: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

EPYC 9115

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $469 less on MSRP ($726 MSRP vs $1,195 MSRP).
✅Delivers 63.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 66.6 vs 40.8 PassMark/$ ($726 MSRP vs $1,195 MSRP).
✅Draws 125W instead of 190W, a 65W reduction.
✅45.5% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 88) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon 6517P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (48,343 vs 48,810).

Xeon 6517P

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +14.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 40.8 vs 66.6 PassMark/$ ($1,195 MSRP vs $726 MSRP).
❌52% higher power demand at 190W vs 125W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon 6517P better than EPYC 9115?

Yes. Xeon 6517P is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 14.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 1% 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, Xeon 6517P is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 14.2% 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 6517P is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads.

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

Xeon 6517P is still the faster CPU overall, but EPYC 9115 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. Xeon 6517P comes in 64.6% more expensive on MSRP at $1,195 MSRP versus $726 MSRP, and it still gives you a 14.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. EPYC 9115 is also 63.0% better value on MSRP (66.6 vs 40.8 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

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

Xeon 6517P makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2024) and more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 32 threads instead of 16/32. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

EPYC 9115 vs Xeon 6517P Technical Specifications

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

EPYC 9115

The EPYC 9115 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 48,343 points. Launch price was $726.

Xeon 6517P

The Xeon 6517P is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 February 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Granite Rapids (2024−2025) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L3 cache: 72 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4710. Thermal design power (TDP): 190 Watt. Memory support: DDR5(6400MT/s). Passmark benchmark score: 48,810 points. Launch price was $1,195.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the EPYC 9115 and Xeon 6517P share an identical 16-core/32-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.1 GHz on the EPYC 9115 versus 4.2 GHz on the Xeon 6517P — a 2.4% clock advantage for the Xeon 6517P (base: 2.6 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The EPYC 9115 uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Xeon 6517P uses Granite Rapids (2024−2025) (Intel 3 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9115 scores 48,343 against the Xeon 6517P's 48,810 — a 1% lead for the Xeon 6517P. L3 cache: 64 MB (total) on the EPYC 9115 vs 72 MB (total) on the Xeon 6517P.

Feature	EPYC 9115	Xeon 6517P
Cores / Threads	16 / 32	16 / 32
Boost Clock	4.1 GHz	4.2 GHz+2%
Base Clock	2.6 GHz	3.2 GHz+23%
L3 Cache	64 MB (total)	72 MB (total)+13%
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	2 MB (per core)+100%
Process	4 nm	Intel 3 nm-25%
Architecture	Turin (2024)	Granite Rapids (2024−2025)
PassMark	48,343	48,810

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9115 uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon 6517P uses LGA4710 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 4800 on the EPYC 9115 versus 6400 on the Xeon 6517P — the Xeon 6517P supports 33.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9115 supports up to 6144 of RAM compared to 4096 — 50% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9115) vs 8 (Xeon 6517P). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9115) vs 88 (Xeon 6517P) — the EPYC 9115 offers 40 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9115) and Granite Rapids-SP (Xeon 6517P).

Feature	EPYC 9115	Xeon 6517P
Socket	SP5	LGA4710
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	4800	6400+33%
Max RAM Capacity	6144+50%	4096
RAM Channels	12+50%	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+45%	88

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V (EPYC 9115) vs VT-x, VT-d (Xeon 6517P). Direct competitor: EPYC 9115 rivals Xeon Platinum 8468X; Xeon 6517P rivals EPYC 9554.

Feature	EPYC 9115	Xeon 6517P
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V	VT-x, VT-d

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the EPYC 9115 was priced at $726, while the Xeon 6517P came in at $1195. On launch pricing ($726 vs $1195), EPYC 9115 was $469 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9115 delivers 66.6 pts/$ vs 40.8 pts/$ for the Xeon 6517P — making the EPYC 9115 the 47.9% better value option.

Feature	EPYC 9115	Xeon 6517P
MSRP	$726-39%	$1195
Performance per Dollar	66.6+63%	40.8
Release Date	2024	2025

Search EPYC 9115 on Amazon

Search Xeon 6517P on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.