The EPYC 9354 is at least 2x faster gaming CPU than the Pentium G645. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Advantages of the EPYC 9354
- At least 2x faster CPU for gaming
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously – 64 vs 2 threads
Advantages of the Pentium G645
- Consumes up to 77% less energy – 65 vs 280 Watts
- Has an integrated GPU, while the EPYC 9354 cannot run games without a dedicated GPU
EPYC 9354 vs Pentium G645 for Gaming
The CPU's performance in selected game and settings
EPYC 9354
Nov 10th, 2022
Average FPS
194
100%
Min 1% FPS
128
100%
Price, CA$
Out of Stock
Value, CA$/FPS
Not Available
All items are out of stock.
Pentium G645
Sep 2nd, 2012
Average FPS
167
86%
Min 1% FPS
112
88%
Price, CA$
CA$58.17
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$0.34/FPS
100%
EPYC 9354 vs Pentium G645 in My Games
The FPS you'll get in saved games
The FPS you'll get in saved games
Add a Game
Select Settings
Synthetic Benchmarks
The EPYC 9354 vs Pentium G645 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The EPYC 9354 vs Pentium G645 in core CPU performance specifications
EPYC 9354
Nov 10th, 2022
Cores
32-core
100%
L3 Cache
256 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.25 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.8 GHz
100%
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
4800 MHz
100%
Pentium G645
Sep 2nd, 2012
Cores
2-core
6%
L3 Cache
3 MB
1%
Base Frequency
2.9 GHz
89%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Specifications
Comparison of all specifications
EPYC 9354 | SpecificationsComparison of all specifications | Pentium G645 |
---|---|---|
General | ||
Nov 10th, 2022 | Release Date | Sep 2nd, 2012 |
$3,420.00 | MSRP | Not Available |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
AMD Socket SP5 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Not Available | Codename | Sandy Bridge |
280 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
Performance | ||
32 | Cores | 2 |
64 | Threads | 2 |
3.3 GHz | Base Frequency | 2.9 GHz |
3.8 GHz | Turbo Frequency | Non-Turbo |
256 MB | L3 Cache | 3 MB |
Other Features | ||
DDR5 @ 4800 MHz | RAM | DDR3 |
No | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD (Sandy Bridge) |
No | Overclockable | No |