EPYC 9474F vs EPYC 9254

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 9254
2022
24 cores / 48 threads, 200 Watt
42.71
EPYC 9474F
2022
48 cores / 96 threads, 360 Watt
66.11
+54.8%

EPYC 9474F outperforms EPYC 9254 by an impressive 55% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 9254 and EPYC 9474F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking5411
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation15.755.29
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesAMD EPYCAMD EPYC
Power efficiency20.2117.38
Architecture codenameGenoa (2022−2023)Genoa (2022−2023)
Release date10 November 2022 (2 years ago)10 November 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,299$6,780

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 9254 has 198% better value for money than EPYC 9474F.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 9254 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 cores24 (Tetracosa-Core)48 (Octatetraconta-Core)
Threads4896
Base clock speed2.9 GHz3.6 GHz
Boost clock speed4.15 GHz4.1 GHz
Multiplier2936
L1 cache64K (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache128 MB (shared)256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography5 nm, 6 nm5 nm, 6 nm
Die size4x 72 mm28x 72 mm2
Number of transistors26,280 million52,560 million
64 bit support++

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 9254 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 configuration22
SocketSP5SP5
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt360 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 9254 and EPYC 9474F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX++
Precision Boost 2++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 9254 and EPYC 9474F are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 9254 and EPYC 9474F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR5-4800DDR5-4800
Maximum memory size6 TiB6 TiB
Maximum memory bandwidth460.8 GB/s460.8 GB/s

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 9254 and EPYC 9474F.

PCIe version5.05.0
PCI Express lanes128128

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

EPYC 9254 42.71
EPYC 9474F 66.11
+54.8%

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.

EPYC 9254 67847
EPYC 9474F 105010
+54.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 42.71 66.11
Physical cores 24 48
Threads 48 96
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 360 Watt

EPYC 9254 has 80% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9474F, on the other hand, has a 54.8% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

The EPYC 9474F is our recommended choice as it beats the EPYC 9254 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 9254 and EPYC 9474F, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD EPYC 9254
EPYC 9254
AMD EPYC 9474F
EPYC 9474F

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 9254 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 19 votes

Rate EPYC 9474F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 9254 or EPYC 9474F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.