AMD Epyc 9374F vs Intel Xeon Platinum 8592 Plus
SOURCE ARTICLES
AMD EPYC 9374F Benchmark, Test and specs
www.cpu-monkey.com
The AMD EPYC 9374F is a 32-core processor with 64 threads. It is based on the 4th generation of the AMD EPYC series and requires a mainboard with the socket SP5. The processor has a frequency of 3.85 GHz and a turbo frequency of 4.30 GHz for 1 core and 4.10 GHz for 32 cores. It supports up to 6144 GB of memory in 12 memory channels and has a maximum memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The TDP of the processor is 320 W and it is built on a 5 nm chip design. It supports AES-NI, virtualization, and various instruction set extensions. The AMD EPYC 9374F was released in Q4/2022 with a price of $4850.
AMD EPYC™ 9374F Processor STAC-N1™ Benchmark Results
community.amd.com
The blog discusses the performance of the 4th Gen AMD EPYC processors in critical financial workloads. It introduces the STAC-N1 benchmark, which measures network stack performance in a simulated market data environment. The tested configuration used two HPE ProLiant DL325 Gen11 servers powered by one AMD EPYC 9374F processor. The results showed excellent UDP performance, with low latency and high throughput. The benchmark is important for the financial services industry, particularly high-frequency trading applications. The AMD EPYC processors offer features like high core count, large cache, and fast PCIe lanes, making them ideal for the FSI market.
A Single 32-Core AMD EPYC 9374F ‘Genoa’ CPUs Beats Dual Intel Xeon Platinum 8380 40-Core CPUs
wccftech.com
The AMD EPYC 9374F Genoa CPU outperforms dual Intel Xeon Platinum 8380 CPUs in benchmarks, showing better performance and efficiency on Linux. The EPYC 9374F has 32 cores, 64 threads, and a base clock of 3.85 GHz. It consumes less power than the Intel Xeon processors and offers strong multi-core performance. AMD continues to make strides in improving its products, while Intel faces delays and struggles to compete.
Genoa's 32-Core High Frequency CPU
Summary:
The reviewer requests the inclusion of relational database benchmarks in the regular test regimen, as they believe it is valuable to judge a CPU's performance across generations. They note the absence of these benchmarks and the presence of seemingly redundant variations of other benchmarks in the test scripts.
AMD 4th-Gen EPYC Genoa 9654, 9554, and 9374F Review: 96 Cores, Zen 4 and 5nm
AMD 4th-Gen EPYC Genoa Review Summary
- AMD's 4th-Gen EPYC Genoa processors offer impressive performance in various benchmarks.
- The 96-core EPYC 9654 outperforms Intel's Xeon Platinum 8380 in molecular dynamics, rendering, and compilation workloads.
- The 64-core EPYC 9554 shows a solid 33% increase in performance compared to the previous-gen EPYC 7763.
- Genoa chips dominate Intel-designed benchmarks, providing more than twice the performance.
- Genoa processors excel in multi-threaded workloads and frequency-sensitive tasks.
- Higher core counts and per-core performance give Genoa chips an advantage over Intel's Ice Lake processors.
- Genoa's superior clock speeds and cache capacity contribute to its impressive performance in Python and compression workloads.
- Intel's Ice Lake processors trail behind both Milan and Genoa chips in terms of performance.
- Encoders benefit from per-core performance and cache capacity, where Genoa processors outshine Intel's Ice Lake.
Xeon Platinum 8592+
The Xeon Platinum 8592+ is a professional desktop processor with 64 cores and 128 threads. It is based on 10 nm manufacturing technology and has a maximum frequency of 3900 MHz. It is compatible with Intel Socket 4677 and supports DDR5 memory. The processor's benchmark results are not available. It has a TDP of 350 Watt and a maximum temperature of 81 °C. The Xeon Platinum 8592+ supports various technologies aimed at improving security and virtualization. It does not have an integrated graphics card.
Intel Xeon Platinum 8592+ "Emerald Rapids" Linux Benchmarks
The review compares the performance of AMD's EPYC processors with Intel's Xeon Platinum 8592+. AMD's processors have higher clock speeds and core counts, allowing them to outperform Intel's offerings. AMD's superior manufacturing process enables them to fit more processing resources into a similar-sized die. The Xeon Platinum 8592+ has accelerators that can boost performance at low power consumption. Intel is expected to release Xeons with higher core counts and power efficiency in the future. AMD may counter with processors featuring fat, wide cores and SMT-4 capability. 2024 is predicted to be an interesting year.
+ 4
AI COMPARISON
Comparison Table
| Feature | AMD Epyc 9374F | Intel Xeon Platinum 8592 Plus |
|---|---|---|
| Cores/Threads | 32 cores, 64 threads | 64 cores, 128 threads |
| Base Clock | 3.85 GHz | 3.9 GHz (Max Frequency) |
| Turbo Clock | 4.3 GHz (1 core), 4.1 GHz (32 cores) | 3.9 GHz |
| Max Memory Support | 6144 GB | 4000 GB |
| Memory Channels | 12 | 8 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | Not specified |
| PCIe Version | 5 | 5 |
| Max RAM Speed | 4800 MHz | 5600 MHz |
| L3 Cache | 256 MB | 320 MB |
| TDP | 320 W | 350 W |
| Semiconductor Size | 5 nm | 10 nm |
| Instruction Sets | SSE 4.1, SSE 4.2 | MMX, F16C, FMA3, AVX, AES, AVX2, SSE 4.1, SSE 4.2 |
| Multithreading | Yes | Yes |
| Price | $4850 | Not specified |
Product Comparison Summary
The AMD Epyc 9374F and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8592 Plus cater to high-performance computing markets, but they exhibit distinct characteristics suitable for different use scenarios:
- Core Count and Performance: The AMD Epyc 9374F has fewer cores and threads (32/64) compared to Intel's 64/128. However, benchmarks indicate that AMD competes favorably in performance metrics, even surpassing the Intel in some multi-core scenarios.
- Memory and Bandwidth: AMD supports a higher maximum memory capacity (6144 GB vs. 4000 GB) and operates with 12 memory channels, compared to Intel's 8. This could make AMD a better option for memory-intensive applications.
- Power Efficiency and Thermal Design: The AMD chip uses a 5 nm process which might offer better efficiency than Intel's 10 nm process. Although AMD's TDP is slightly lower (320 W vs. 350 W), both processors manage significant power demands typical of server environments.
- Market Positioning: Both processors are aimed at enterprise servers, with AMD receiving positive feedback for its performance in financial services and critical workloads, as demonstrated in the STAC-N1 benchmarks.
Recommendations
- For Financial Services and High-Performance Computing: The AMD Epyc 9374F is recommended due to its proven performance in handling financial workloads efficiently and its superior memory support.
- For Future-Proof Infrastructure: Intel might be preferable for users looking for potential future enhancements like onboard RAM and additional accelerators, as hinted at future developments.
- General Server Use: AMD's 9374F offers a compelling price-to-performance ratio and should be considered by users needing robust multi-threaded performance and extensive memory capacity.
PRICES
ASK AI
BestVs.ai
Hello, I'm your AI shopping assistant. How can I help you?
AI can make mistakes. Consider checking important information.
