EPYC 9174F vs Xeon 6511P

EPYC 9174F vs Xeon 6511P Performance Spectrum

EPYC 9174F

16 / 32

52,249

+1.9%

Ryzen 9 7940H

Ryzen 7 PRO 7745

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen 9 5950X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9970X

Xeon 6511P

16 / 32

51,286

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 9174F vs Xeon 6511P 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 9174F vs Xeon 6511P: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

EPYC 9174F

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +31.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $621 less on MSRP ($194 MSRP vs $815 MSRP).
✅Delivers 328.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 269.3 vs 62.9 PassMark/$ ($194 MSRP vs $815 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌113.3% higher power demand at 320W vs 150W.

Xeon 6511P

2025

Why buy it

✅Draws 150W instead of 320W, a 170W reduction.
✅6.3% more PCIe lanes (136 vs 128) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9174F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (51,286 vs 52,249).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 62.9 vs 269.3 PassMark/$ ($815 MSRP vs $194 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9174F better than Xeon 6511P?

Yes. EPYC 9174F is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 31.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 1.9% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, EPYC 9174F is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 31.8% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests. It also has a clear cache advantage at 256 MB versus 72 MB.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9174F is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.9% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 255.6% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 72 MB).

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

EPYC 9174F is the better buy right now. EPYC 9174F comes in $621 cheaper on MSRP at $194 MSRP versus $815 MSRP, and it still gives you a 31.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 328.0% better value on MSRP (269.3 vs 62.9 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Xeon 6511P makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2022). That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

EPYC 9174F vs Xeon 6511P Technical Specifications

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

EPYC 9174F

The EPYC 9174F 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 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 4.1 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 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): 320 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 52,249 points. Launch price was $3,850.

Xeon 6511P

The Xeon 6511P 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 2.3 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): 150 Watt. Memory support: DDR5(6400MT/s). Passmark benchmark score: 51,286 points. Launch price was $815.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the EPYC 9174F and Xeon 6511P share an identical 16-core/32-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the EPYC 9174F versus 4.2 GHz on the Xeon 6511P — a 4.7% clock advantage for the EPYC 9174F (base: 4.1 GHz vs 2.3 GHz). The EPYC 9174F uses the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture (5 nm, 6 nm), while the Xeon 6511P uses Granite Rapids (2024−2025) (Intel 3 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9174F scores 52,249 against the Xeon 6511P's 51,286 — a 1.9% lead for the EPYC 9174F. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9174F vs 72 MB (total) on the Xeon 6511P.

Feature	EPYC 9174F	Xeon 6511P
Cores / Threads	16 / 32	16 / 32
Boost Clock	4.4 GHz+5%	4.2 GHz
Base Clock	4.1 GHz+78%	2.3 GHz
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)+256%	72 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	2 MB (per core)+100%
Process	5 nm, 6 nm	Intel 3 nm-40%
Architecture	Genoa (2022−2023)	Granite Rapids (2024−2025)
PassMark	52,249+2%	51,286
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,800
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	20,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9174F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon 6511P uses LGA4710 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 4800 on the EPYC 9174F versus DDR5-6400 on the Xeon 6511P — the Xeon 6511P supports 33.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9174F supports up to 6144 GB of RAM compared to 4096 GB — 50% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9174F) vs 8 (Xeon 6511P). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9174F) vs 136 (Xeon 6511P) — the Xeon 6511P offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9174F) and C741 (Xeon 6511P).

Feature	EPYC 9174F	Xeon 6511P
Socket	SP5	LGA4710
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	4800	DDR5-6400+33%
Max RAM Capacity	6144 GB+50%	4096 GB
RAM Channels	12+50%	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128	136+6%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. Primary use case: Xeon 6511P targets Server. Direct competitor: EPYC 9174F rivals Xeon Platinum 8468; Xeon 6511P rivals EPYC 9684X.

Feature	EPYC 9174F	Xeon 6511P
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	—	Server

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the EPYC 9174F was priced at $194, while the Xeon 6511P came in at $815. On launch pricing ($194 vs $815), EPYC 9174F was $621 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9174F delivers 269.3 pts/$ vs 62.9 pts/$ for the Xeon 6511P — making the EPYC 9174F the 124.2% better value option.

Feature	EPYC 9174F	Xeon 6511P
MSRP	$194-76%	$815
Performance per Dollar	269.3+328%	62.9
Release Date	2022	2025

Search EPYC 9174F on Amazon

Search Xeon 6511P 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.