EPYC 9254
Xeon w7-3465X
EPYC 9254 vs Xeon w7-3465X Performance Spectrum
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 9254 vs Xeon w7-3465X 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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
EPYC 9254 vs Xeon w7-3465X: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
EPYC 9254
2022Why buy it
- ✅+10.2% higher Geekbench multi-core.
- ✅+70.7% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 75 MB).
- ✅Draws 200W instead of 300W, a 100W reduction.
- ✅14.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 112) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon w7-3465X across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 17.1 vs 21.7 PassMark/$ ($3,761 MSRP vs $2,889 MSRP).
Xeon w7-3465X
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +7.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $872 less on MSRP ($2,889 MSRP vs $3,761 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 26.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 21.7 vs 17.1 PassMark/$ ($2,889 MSRP vs $3,761 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (16,351 vs 18,023).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (75 MB vs 128 MB).
- ❌50% higher power demand at 300W vs 200W.
Quick Answers
So, is Xeon w7-3465X better than EPYC 9254?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
EPYC 9254 vs Xeon w7-3465X Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
EPYC 9254
The EPYC 9254 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 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 4.15 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm, 6 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 200 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 64,344 points. Launch price was $2,299.
Xeon w7-3465X
The Xeon w7-3465X is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 February 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) architecture. It features 28 cores and 56 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 75 MB. L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4677. Thermal design power (TDP): 300 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 62,663 points. Launch price was $2,889.
Processing Power
The EPYC 9254 packs 24 cores / 48 threads, while the Xeon w7-3465X offers 28 cores / 56 threads — the Xeon w7-3465X has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.15 GHz on the EPYC 9254 versus 4.8 GHz on the Xeon w7-3465X — a 14.5% clock advantage for the Xeon w7-3465X (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The EPYC 9254 uses the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture (5 nm, 6 nm), while the Xeon w7-3465X uses Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9254 scores 64,344 against the Xeon w7-3465X's 62,663 — a 2.6% lead for the EPYC 9254. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,233 vs 1,959, a 13.1% lead for the EPYC 9254 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 18,023 vs 16,351 (9.7% advantage for the EPYC 9254). L3 cache: 128 MB (total) on the EPYC 9254 vs 75 MB on the Xeon w7-3465X.
| Feature | EPYC 9254 | Xeon w7-3465X |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 24 / 48 | 28 / 56+17% |
| Boost Clock | 4.15 GHz | 4.8 GHz+16% |
| Base Clock | 2.9 GHz+16% | 2.5 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 128 MB (total)+71% | 75 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core)+100% |
| Process | 5 nm, 6 nm-29% | Intel 7 nm |
| Architecture | Genoa (2022−2023) | Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) |
| PassMark | 64,344+3% | 62,663 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,233+14% | 1,959 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 18,023+10% | 16,351 |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 9254 uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon w7-3465X uses LGA4677 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-4800 memory speed. The EPYC 9254 supports up to 6144 GB of RAM compared to 4096 GB — 50% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9254) vs 8 (Xeon w7-3465X). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9254) vs 112 (Xeon w7-3465X) — the EPYC 9254 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9254) and Intel W790 (Xeon w7-3465X).
| Feature | EPYC 9254 | Xeon w7-3465X |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP5 | LGA4677 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0 | PCIe 5.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800 | DDR5-4800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 6144 GB+50% | 4096 GB |
| RAM Channels | 12+50% | 8 |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128+14% | 112 |
Advanced Features
Only the Xeon w7-3465X has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: AMD-V (EPYC 9254) vs true (Xeon w7-3465X). Primary use case: EPYC 9254 targets Enterprise Server. Direct competitor: EPYC 9254 rivals Xeon Platinum 8468; Xeon w7-3465X rivals Threadripper PRO 7965WX.
| Feature | EPYC 9254 | Xeon w7-3465X |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | None | None |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | Yes | Yes |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | true |
| Target Use | Enterprise Server | — |
Value Analysis
At launch, the EPYC 9254 was priced at $3761, while the Xeon w7-3465X came in at $2889. On launch pricing ($3761 vs $2889), Xeon w7-3465X was $872 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9254 delivers 17.1 pts/$ vs 21.7 pts/$ for the Xeon w7-3465X — making the Xeon w7-3465X the 23.6% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 9254 | Xeon w7-3465X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $3761 | $2889-23% |
| Performance per Dollar | 17.1 | 21.7+27% |
| Release Date | 2022 | 2023 |
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.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on EPYC 9254 and Xeon w7-3465X
