EPYC 9474F vs Xeon 696X
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 9474F outperforms Xeon 696X by a minimal 2% 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 | 36 | 33 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 7.96 | 5.86 |
| Market segment | Server | Server |
| Series | no data | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | 6.89 | 6.85 |
| 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 | $6,780 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon 696X has 36% better value for money than EPYC 9474F.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Xeon 696X and EPYC 9474F 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) | 48 (Octatetraconta-Core) |
| Performance-cores | 64 | no data |
| Threads | 128 | 96 |
| Base clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.8 GHz | 4.1 GHz |
| Bus rate | 0 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | no data | 36 |
| 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 9474F 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 | 360 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon 696X and EPYC 9474F. 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 9474F 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 9474F 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 9474F. 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 9474F.
| 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 | 57.16 | 58.42 |
| Recency | 2 February 2026 | 10 November 2022 |
| Physical cores | 64 | 48 |
| Threads | 128 | 96 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 360 Watt |
Xeon 696X has an age advantage of 3 years, 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, and 2.9% lower power consumption.
EPYC 9474F, on the other hand, has a 2.2% higher aggregate performance score.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Intel Xeon 696X and AMD EPYC 9474F.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
