EPYC 9474F vs Xeon 6781P

CPU

GPU

EPYC 9474F

48 Cores96 Thrd360 WWMax: 4.1 GHz2022

EPYC family

·······

Buy on Amazon

Xeon 6781P

80 Cores160 Thrd350 WWMax: 3.8 GHz2025

Buy on Amazon

EPYC 9474F vs Xeon 6781P Performance Spectrum

EPYC 9474F

48 / 96

102,255

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7960X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7980X

Ryzen Threadripper 9980X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX

Xeon 6781P

80 / 160

117,946

+15.3%

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 9474F vs Xeon 6781P 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 9474F vs Xeon 6781P: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

EPYC 9474F

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +26.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $2,180 less on MSRP ($6,780 MSRP vs $8,960 MSRP).
✅Delivers 14.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 15.1 vs 13.2 PassMark/$ ($6,780 MSRP vs $8,960 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (102,255 vs 117,946).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (256 MB vs 336 MB).

Xeon 6781P

2025

Why buy it

✅+15.3% higher PassMark.
✅+31.3% larger total L3 cache (336 MB vs 256 MB).
✅Draws 350W instead of 360W, a 10W 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 9474F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 13.2 vs 15.1 PassMark/$ ($8,960 MSRP vs $6,780 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon 6781P better than EPYC 9474F?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, EPYC 9474F is ahead with a 26.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Xeon 6781P pulls ahead with 15.3% better PassMark. Xeon 6781P also has the bigger cache pool with 31.3% larger total L3 cache (336 MB vs 256 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon 6781P is the stronger fit. You are getting 15.3% better PassMark, backed by 80 cores and 160 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 31.3% larger total L3 cache (336 MB vs 256 MB).

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

Xeon 6781P is still the faster CPU overall, but EPYC 9474F is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. Xeon 6781P comes in 32.2% more expensive on MSRP at $8,960 MSRP versus $6,780 MSRP, and it still gives you 15.3% better PassMark. The compromise is that EPYC 9474F is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 26.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. EPYC 9474F is also 14.6% better value on MSRP (15.1 vs 13.2 PassMark/$), 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 6781P makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2022), 31.3% larger total L3 cache (336 MB vs 256 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 80 cores / 160 threads instead of 48/96. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

EPYC 9474F vs Xeon 6781P Technical Specifications

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

EPYC 9474F

The EPYC 9474F 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 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 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): 360 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 102,255 points. Launch price was $6,780.

Xeon 6781P

The Xeon 6781P 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 80 cores and 160 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 336 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4710. Thermal design power (TDP): 350 Watt. Memory support: DDR5(6400MT/s), MRDIMM(8800MT/s). Passmark benchmark score: 117,946 points. Launch price was $8,960.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9474F packs 48 cores / 96 threads, while the Xeon 6781P offers 80 cores / 160 threads — the Xeon 6781P has 32 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.1 GHz on the EPYC 9474F versus 3.8 GHz on the Xeon 6781P — a 7.6% clock advantage for the EPYC 9474F (base: 3.6 GHz vs 2 GHz). The EPYC 9474F uses the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture (5 nm, 6 nm), while the Xeon 6781P uses Granite Rapids (2024−2025) (Intel 3 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9474F scores 102,255 against the Xeon 6781P's 117,946 — a 14.3% lead for the Xeon 6781P. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9474F vs 336 MB (total) on the Xeon 6781P.

Feature	EPYC 9474F	Xeon 6781P
Cores / Threads	48 / 96	80 / 160+67%
Boost Clock	4.1 GHz+8%	3.8 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+80%	2 GHz
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)	336 MB (total)+31%
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	102,255	117,946+15%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9474F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon 6781P uses LGA4710 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-4800 on the EPYC 9474F versus DDR5-6400 on the Xeon 6781P — the Xeon 6781P supports 33.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9474F supports up to 6 TB of RAM compared to 4 TB — 50% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9474F) vs 8 (Xeon 6781P). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9474F) vs 136 (Xeon 6781P) — the Xeon 6781P offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	EPYC 9474F	Xeon 6781P
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%	4 TB
RAM Channels	12+50%	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128	136+6%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9474F) vs VT-x, VT-d, VT-x EPT (Xeon 6781P). Primary use case: EPYC 9474F targets Data Center / Performance Optimized, Xeon 6781P targets Data Center / Cloud Scale. Direct competitor: EPYC 9474F rivals Xeon 8461V; Xeon 6781P rivals EPYC 9655.

Feature	EPYC 9474F	Xeon 6781P
Integrated GPU	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V, SEV-SNP	VT-x, VT-d, VT-x EPT
Target Use	Data Center / Performance Optimized	Data Center / Cloud Scale

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the EPYC 9474F was priced at $6780, while the Xeon 6781P came in at $8960. On launch pricing ($6780 vs $8960), EPYC 9474F was $2180 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9474F delivers 15.1 pts/$ vs 13.2 pts/$ for the Xeon 6781P — making the EPYC 9474F the 13.6% better value option.

Feature	EPYC 9474F	Xeon 6781P
MSRP	$6780-24%	$8960
Performance per Dollar	15.1+14%	13.2
Release Date	2022	2025

Search EPYC 9474F on Amazon

Search Xeon 6781P 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.