EPYC 9174F vs Xeon 696X
Aggregate performance score
Xeon 696X outperforms EPYC 9174F by a whopping 112% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 25 | 183 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 8.98 | 7.32 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | no data | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | 7.78 | 4.01 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | Intel | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Granite Rapids (2024−2026) | Genoa (2022−2023) |
| Release date | 2 February 2026 (recently) | 10 November 2022 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $5,599 | $3,850 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon 696X has 23% better value for money than EPYC 9174F.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Xeon 696X and EPYC 9174F basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Performance-cores | 64 | no data |
| Threads | 128 | 32 |
| Base clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 4.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.8 GHz | 4.4 GHz |
| Bus rate | 0 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | no data | 41 |
| L1 cache | 112 KB (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 2 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 336 MB (shared) | 256 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | Intel 3 nm | 5 nm, 6 nm |
| Die size | 2x 598 mm2 | 8x 72 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 80 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 52,560 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon 696X and EPYC 9174F compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 2 |
| Socket | FCLGA4710 | SP5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 320 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon 696X and EPYC 9174F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Speed Shift | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| TSX | + | - |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | + | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
| Deep Learning Boost | + | - |
Security technologies
Xeon 696X and EPYC 9174F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
| SGX | - | no data |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon 696X and EPYC 9174F are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon 696X and EPYC 9174F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5(6400MT/s)MRDIMM(8000MT/s) | DDR5-4800 |
| Maximum memory size | 4 TB | 6 TiB |
| Max memory channels | 8 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 460.8 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon 696X and EPYC 9174F.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 128 | 128 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 64.44 | 30.35 |
| Recency | 2 February 2026 | 10 November 2022 |
| Physical cores | 64 | 16 |
| Threads | 128 | 32 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 320 Watt |
Xeon 696X has a 112.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads.
EPYC 9174F, on the other hand, has 9.4% lower power consumption.
The Intel Xeon 696X is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD EPYC 9174F in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
