AMD EPYC 4244P vs Intel Xeon 6353P Comparison

The AMD EPYC 4244P and Intel Xeon 6353P are both 65W server/workstation processors, but the benchmark data reveals a clear split in their strengths. The AMD EPYC 4244P takes 13 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, including all Cinebench tests and several PassMark workloads, while the Intel Xeon 6353P counters with decisive wins in floating-point math, integer math, and single-threaded PassMark tests. Both CPUs sit at the 84th percentile among all tested processors, with the AMD part posting an average benchmark score of 34,220 against the Intel part’s 33,844. The choice between them depends entirely on whether the workload favors the EPYC’s broad multi-core efficiency or the Xeon’s raw compute throughput in specific math-heavy tasks.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD EPYC 4244P as the default choice for mixed server workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23,089 beats the Xeon’s 22,058 by 4.7%, and that same 4.7% advantage carries through every Cinebench iteration, from R15 to R23, in both single-core and multi-core tests. In PassMark’s multithread benchmark, the EPYC wins again, posting 26,797 against 25,951, a 3.3% margin. For data compression, encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, physics, and random string sorting, the EPYC also holds the lead, with margins ranging from 6% to a massive 47.2%. This consistency makes the EPYC 4244P the safer pick for general-purpose server use, database work, or any workload that mixes integer and encryption tasks.

The Intel Xeon 6353P, however, is not without its own territory. It dominates in PassMark floating-point math with a score of 63,509 versus the EPYC’s 45,546, a 28.3% advantage. It also wins PassMark integer math at 86,836 against 78,709, a 9.4% edge, and takes PassMark single-thread with 4,226 against 3,710, a 12.2% margin. These wins suggest the Xeon is better suited for scientific computing, financial modeling, or any application that relies heavily on floating-point arithmetic or benefits from higher single-thread PassMark performance. For those specific workloads, the Xeon’s performance lead is substantial enough to justify its selection despite losing the majority of other tests.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD EPYC 4244P uses the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Raphael, built on TSMC’s 5 nm process with 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die. It packs 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Intel Xeon 6353P, by contrast, uses Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-R, built on Intel’s 10 nm process with a significantly larger 257 mm² die. It offers 8 cores and 16 threads, with a lower base clock of 2.70 GHz but a higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz.

Cache configurations differ notably. The EPYC allocates 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, with a shared 32 MB L3 cache. The Xeon allocates more per core — 80 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2 — but its shared L3 is smaller at 24 MB. This means the Xeon has more private cache per core, which may contribute to its single-thread PassMark win, while the EPYC’s larger shared L3 pool benefits multi-threaded workloads that share data. Both support ECC memory, but the EPYC is limited to DDR5 with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, while the Xeon supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory, though no bandwidth figure is listed.

Memory and I/O also diverge. The EPYC uses AMD Socket AM5 and provides 28 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), along with integrated Radeon Graphics. The Xeon uses Intel Socket 1700 with only 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only) and has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU for display output. The EPYC launched in May 2024 with a launch MSRP of $229, while the Xeon launched in February 2025 with a launch MSRP of $426. Both parts have locked multipliers, so overclocking is not an option.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 4244P wins in every Cinebench test, which measures real-world rendering and 3D workload performance. Its R15 multi-core score of 2,327 beats the Xeon’s 2,223 by 4.7%, and its R23 single-core score of 3,259 beats the Xeon’s 3,114 by the same 4.7% margin. This consistency suggests the EPYC’s Zen 4 architecture delivers better instructions-per-clock for these threaded workloads, despite having fewer cores and threads. In PassMark, the EPYC also wins data compression (302,606 vs 285,581, up 6%), data encryption (18,232 vs 15,228, up 19.7%), extended instructions (22,149 vs 18,311, up 21%), prime number finding (187 vs 127, up 47.2%), multithread (26,797 vs 25,951, up 3.3%), physics (1,981 vs 1,845, up 7.4%), and random string sorting (38,048 vs 31,226, up 21.8%). These results indicate the EPYC is the stronger part for encryption-heavy workloads, cryptography, sorting algorithms, and physics simulations.

The Intel Xeon 6353P wins in PassMark floating-point math, integer math, and single-thread tests. Its floating-point score of 63,509 is 28.3% higher than the EPYC’s 45,546, a substantial gap that indicates superior vector processing or more efficient FPU execution. Its integer math score of 86,836 beats the EPYC’s 78,709 by 9.4%, and its single-thread score of 4,226 beats the EPYC’s 3,710 by 12.2%. These wins point toward workloads like scientific calculations, engineering simulations, or any application that performs heavy arithmetic on large data sets. The Xeon’s higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz likely contributes to its single-thread PassMark advantage, while the larger per-core L2 cache may help with integer and floating-point operations that fit within that private cache.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD EPYC 4244P scores 23,089 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 4.7% higher than the Intel Xeon 6353P’s score of 22,058.

Q: How much faster is the Intel Xeon 6353P in floating-point math?

A: The Xeon 6353P scores 63,509 in PassMark floating-point math, which is 28.3% higher than the EPYC 4244P’s score of 45,546.

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon 6353P has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD EPYC 4244P has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the AMD EPYC 4244P?

A: The EPYC 4244P has dual-channel DDR5 memory support with a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The Xeon 6353P supports both DDR4 and DDR5 but no bandwidth figure is listed in the data.

Q: Which processor wins in data encryption?

A: The AMD EPYC 4244P scores 18,232 in PassMark data encryption, which is 19.7% higher than the Intel Xeon 6353P’s score of 15,228.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD EPYC 4244P and the Intel Xeon 6353P support ECC memory.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The biggest single win for the AMD EPYC 4244P comes in PassMark’s find prime numbers test, where it scores 187 against the Xeon’s 127 — a 47.2% advantage. This is a striking gap that highlights the EPYC’s efficiency in integer-heavy iterative workloads. The EPYC also shows a 21.8% lead in random string sorting (38,048 vs 31,226) and a 21% lead in extended instructions (22,149 vs 18,311), both of which suggest better handling of algorithmically complex tasks. In data encryption, the EPYC’s 19.7% margin (18,232 vs 15,228) reinforces its suitability for security-centric applications. Even in the multithread PassMark test, where the Xeon has more cores, the EPYC manages to win with 26,797 against 25,951, a 3.3% edge that underscores the efficiency of its Zen 4 cores.

The Intel Xeon 6353P’s largest win is in floating-point math, where it scores 63,509 against the EPYC’s 45,546, a 28.3% advantage. This is the most decisive margin in either direction across all tests. The Xeon also takes integer math at 86,836 versus 78,709, a 9.4% lead, and single-thread PassMark at 4,226 versus 3,710, a 12.2% edge. The single-thread result is notable because the EPYC wins all Cinebench single-core tests by 4.7% to 4.8%, yet loses PassMark single-thread by 12.2%. This divergence suggests the two benchmark suites measure different aspects of single-thread performance — Cinebench favors the EPYC’s instruction efficiency, while PassMark’s single-thread test rewards the Xeon’s higher 5.40 GHz boost clock. For the Cinebench suite, the EPYC wins R15 multi-core (2,327 vs 2,223), R15 single-core (328 vs 313), R20 multi-core (9,697 vs 9,264), R20 single-core (1,368 vs 1,307), R23 multi-core (23,089 vs 22,058), and R23 single-core (3,259 vs 3,114), each by 4.7% or 4.8%. In PassMark, the EPYC additionally wins physics (1,981 vs 1,845, up 7.4%) and data compression (302,606 vs 285,581, up 6%). The overall scoreboard stands at 13 wins for the EPYC and 4 for the Xeon, but the Xeon’s wins in floating-point and integer math are substantial enough to make it the preferred part for compute-heavy scientific workloads.