EPYC 9174F vs Xeon Platinum 8368

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon Platinum 8368
2021
38 cores / 76 threads, 270 Watt
60.15
+65.9%

Xeon Platinum 8368 outperforms EPYC 9174F by an impressive 66% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon Platinum 8368 and EPYC 9174F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19104
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data6.69
Market segmentServerServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Power efficiency20.3110.33
Architecture codenameIce Lake-SP (2021)Genoa (2022−2023)
Release date6 April 2021 (3 years ago)10 November 2022 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$3,850

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Xeon Platinum 8368 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 cores3816 (Hexadeca-Core)
Threads7632
Base clock speed2.4 GHz4.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz4.1 GHz
Multiplierno data41
L1 cache64K (per core)1 MB
L2 cache1 MB (per core)16 MB
L3 cache57 MB (shared)256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography10 nm5 nm, 6 nm
Die sizeno data8x 72 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)83 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data52,560 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data

Compatibility

Information on Xeon Platinum 8368 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 configuration22
SocketFCLGA4189SP5
Power consumption (TDP)270 Watt320 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Platinum 8368 and EPYC 9174F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512no data
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Speed Shift+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX+-
Precision Boost 2no data+
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Xeon Platinum 8368 and EPYC 9174F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
SGXYes with Intel® SPSno data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon Platinum 8368 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 Platinum 8368 and EPYC 9174F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR5-4800
Maximum memory size6 TB6 TiB
Max memory channels8no data
Maximum memory bandwidthno data460.8 GB/s
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Platinum 8368 and EPYC 9174F.

PCIe version4.05.0
PCI Express lanes64128

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.

Xeon Platinum 8368 60.15
+65.9%
EPYC 9174F 36.26

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.

Xeon Platinum 8368 92054
+65.9%
EPYC 9174F 55485

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 60.15 36.26
Recency 6 April 2021 10 November 2022
Physical cores 38 16
Threads 76 32
Chip lithography 10 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 270 Watt 320 Watt

Xeon Platinum 8368 has a 65.9% higher aggregate performance score, 137.5% more physical cores and 137.5% more threads, and 18.5% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9174F, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Xeon Platinum 8368 is our recommended choice as it beats the EPYC 9174F in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Platinum 8368 and EPYC 9174F, 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.


Intel Xeon Platinum 8368
Xeon Platinum 8368
AMD EPYC 9174F
EPYC 9174F

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.


3.6 98 votes

Rate Xeon Platinum 8368 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 3 votes

Rate EPYC 9174F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon Platinum 8368 or EPYC 9174F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.