EPYC 9454P vs Xeon 6747P

EPYC 9454P vs Xeon 6747P Performance Spectrum

EPYC 9454P

48 / 96

94,686

0.0%

Ryzen 9 9850HX

Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

Ryzen 9 9950X3D

Ryzen Threadripper 7960X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7980X

Ryzen Threadripper 9980X

Xeon 6747P

48 / 96

101,685

+7.4%

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 9454P vs Xeon 6747P 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 9454P vs Xeon 6747P: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

EPYC 9454P

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $1,899 less on MSRP ($4,598 MSRP vs $6,497 MSRP).
✅Delivers 31.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 20.6 vs 15.7 PassMark/$ ($4,598 MSRP vs $6,497 MSRP).
✅Draws 290W instead of 330W, a 40W reduction.
✅45.5% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 88) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (18,576 vs 45,000).
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Xeon 6747P

2025

Why buy it

✅+142.2% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9454P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.7 vs 20.6 PassMark/$ ($6,497 MSRP vs $4,598 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9454P better than Xeon 6747P?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, EPYC 9454P is ahead with a 4.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Xeon 6747P pulls ahead with 142.2% better Geekbench multi-core.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon 6747P is the stronger fit. You are getting 142.2% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 48 cores and 96 threads.

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

EPYC 9454P is the better buy right now. EPYC 9454P comes in $1,899 cheaper on MSRP at $4,598 MSRP versus $6,497 MSRP, and it still gives you a 4.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Xeon 6747P is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 142.2% better Geekbench multi-core. It is also 31.6% better value on MSRP (20.6 vs 15.7 PassMark/$), 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 6747P makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2022), more multi-core headroom with 48 cores / 96 threads instead of 48/96, and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

EPYC 9454P vs Xeon 6747P Technical Specifications

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

EPYC 9454P

The EPYC 9454P 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 48 cores and 96 threads. Base frequency is 2.75 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 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): 290 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 94,686 points. Launch price was $4,598.

Xeon 6747P

The Xeon 6747P 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 48 cores and 96 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 288 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4710. Thermal design power (TDP): 330 Watt. Memory support: DDR5(6400MT/s), MRDIMM(8800MT/s). Passmark benchmark score: 101,685 points. Launch price was $6,497.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the EPYC 9454P and Xeon 6747P share an identical 48-core/96-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the EPYC 9454P versus 3.9 GHz on the Xeon 6747P — a 2.6% clock advantage for the Xeon 6747P (base: 2.75 GHz vs 2.7 GHz). The EPYC 9454P uses the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture (5 nm, 6 nm), while the Xeon 6747P uses Granite Rapids (2024−2025) (Intel 3 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9454P scores 94,686 against the Xeon 6747P's 101,685 — a 7.1% lead for the Xeon 6747P. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,923 vs 2,000, a 3.9% lead for the Xeon 6747P that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 18,576 vs 45,000 (83.1% advantage for the Xeon 6747P). L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9454P vs 288 MB (total) on the Xeon 6747P.

Feature	EPYC 9454P	Xeon 6747P
Cores / Threads	48 / 96	48 / 96
Boost Clock	3.8 GHz	3.9 GHz+3%
Base Clock	2.75 GHz+2%	2.7 GHz
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)	288 MB (total)+13%
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	94,686	101,685+7%
Geekbench 6 Single	1,923	2,000+4%
Geekbench 6 Multi	18,576	45,000+142%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9454P uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon 6747P uses LGA4710 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800 on the EPYC 9454P versus DDR5-6400 on the Xeon 6747P — the Xeon 6747P supports 33.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9454P supports up to 6 TB of RAM compared to 4096 GB — 50% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9454P) vs 8 (Xeon 6747P). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9454P) vs 88 (Xeon 6747P) — the EPYC 9454P offers 40 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9454P) and C741 (Xeon 6747P).

Feature	EPYC 9454P	Xeon 6747P
Socket	SP5	LGA4710
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800	DDR5-6400+33%
Max RAM Capacity	6 TB+50%	4096 GB
RAM Channels	12+50%	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+45%	88

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9454P) vs VT-x, VT-d (Xeon 6747P). Primary use case: EPYC 9454P targets Data Center / Single Socket, Xeon 6747P targets High Performance Server. Direct competitor: EPYC 9454P rivals Xeon 8468; Xeon 6747P rivals EPYC 9555.

Feature	EPYC 9454P	Xeon 6747P
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	—	None
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	Yes
Virtualization	AMD-V, SEV-SNP	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	Data Center / Single Socket	High Performance Server

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the EPYC 9454P was priced at $4598, while the Xeon 6747P came in at $6497. On launch pricing ($4598 vs $6497), EPYC 9454P was $1899 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9454P delivers 20.6 pts/$ vs 15.7 pts/$ for the Xeon 6747P — making the EPYC 9454P the 27.3% better value option.

Feature	EPYC 9454P	Xeon 6747P
MSRP	$4598-29%	$6497
Performance per Dollar	20.6+31%	15.7
Release Date	2022	2025

Search EPYC 9454P on Amazon

Search Xeon 6747P 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.