AMD EPYC 4464P vs Intel Xeon w5-3525 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear split between these two workstation processors. The AMD EPYC 4464P wins 13 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, while the Intel Xeon w5-3525 takes 4 wins. The overall average benchmark scores place them close: the Xeon w5-3525 averages 67,673, and the EPYC 4464P averages 64,823. The Xeon sits at the 94th percentile of all CPUs, while the EPYC sits at the 93rd.

The most lopsided Intel victory comes in floating point math. The Xeon w5-3525 scores 121,050, which is 30% ahead of the EPYC's 93,090. Extended instructions also favor Intel decisively, with the Xeon posting 49,242 versus 39,359, a 25.1% advantage. Data compression is another Intel win, 607,435 versus 574,304, a 5.8% gap. The fourth Intel win is physics, where the Xeon scores 3,002 against 2,873, a 4.5% lead.

The AMD EPYC 4464P counters with consistent wins across the Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 40,215 against the Xeon's 38,964, a 3.1% edge. The same 3.1% delta appears in Cinebench R23 single-core (5,677 versus 5,500), R20 multi-core (16,890 versus 16,364), R20 single-core (2,384 versus 2,310), R15 multi-core (4,053 versus 3,927), and R15 single-core (572 versus 554). This uniform 3.1% margin across all Cinebench versions indicates a consistent architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The largest AMD victory is in prime number finding, where the EPYC scores 343 against 218, a 36.4% advantage. Single-thread performance also favors AMD heavily, with the EPYC scoring 4,146 versus 3,330, a 19.7% lead. Data encryption shows a 14.8% AMD edge (35,816 versus 30,507). Random string sorting goes to AMD at 70,200 versus 63,579, a 9.4% gap. Integer math is a narrow AMD win, 160,410 versus 155,282, a 3.2% margin. The PassMark multi-thread test also goes to AMD, 47,514 versus 45,841, a 3.5% lead.

Where Each One Wins

The data suggests distinct usage profiles. The Intel Xeon w5-3525 is the stronger choice for compute-heavy numerical workloads. Its 30% lead in floating point math and 25.1% lead in extended instructions point to applications that rely on AVX-512 style vector processing or heavy mathematical computation. Data compression workloads also favor Intel, with a 5.8% advantage, making it suitable for archival or database-style compression tasks. The physics test win, though modest at 4.5%, reinforces the Intel strength in simulation-style workloads.

The AMD EPYC 4464P dominates everyday workstation tasks and lightly threaded applications. Its 19.7% single-thread lead is substantial, meaning faster response in single-core-centric applications like legacy software or interactive design tools. The 36.4% advantage in prime number finding suggests AMD's integer pipeline is more efficient per clock. Encryption workloads favor AMD by 14.8%, which matters for secure communications or database encryption. The Cinebench wins across all versions indicate that AMD's per-core efficiency translates into better multi-threaded rendering performance despite having fewer cores. Random string sorting, which reflects data manipulation and text processing, goes to AMD by 9.4%.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Xeon w5-3525 uses Sapphire Rapids architecture built on a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry. It packs 16 cores and 32 threads, with a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The chip is physically large, with a die size of 4x 477 mm², and it draws a TDP of 290 watts. The Intel part uses an eight-channel DDR5 memory bus delivering 307.2 GB/s bandwidth. It provides 112 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU.

The AMD EPYC 4464P belongs to the EPYC 4004 series, using Zen 4 architecture on a 5 nm process from TSMC. It has 12 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The die is much smaller at 2x 71 mm², containing 13,140 million transistors. TDP is dramatically lower at 65 watts. Memory support is dual-channel DDR5, delivering 83.2 GB/s, which is less than a third of the Intel's bandwidth. The AMD provides 28 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, a quarter of Intel's count. Notably, the EPYC includes integrated Radeon Graphics, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all.

Cache layouts differ significantly. The Intel Xeon offers 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 45 MB of shared L3. The AMD EPYC has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and a larger 64 MB shared L3. The larger L3 cache likely contributes to AMD's strong single-thread and integer performance. Both chips support DDR5 memory and ECC memory. Both are classified as active production parts for the server/workstation market. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel part number is SRN77, and the AMD part number is 100-000001478.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better single-threaded performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 4464P is clearly ahead in single-thread tests. It scores 4,146 in PassMark single-thread versus 3,330 for the Intel Xeon w5-3525, a 19.7% advantage. Cinebench R23 single-core also favors AMD at 5,677 versus 5,500.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon w5-3525 win any benchmark tests?

A: Yes, the Xeon wins 4 of the 17 head-to-head tests. Its wins include floating point math (121,050 versus 93,090, a 30% lead), extended instructions (49,242 versus 39,359, a 25.1% lead), data compression (607,435 versus 574,304, a 5.8% lead), and physics (3,002 versus 2,873, a 4.5% lead).

Q: How do their core counts compare?

A: The Intel Xeon w5-3525 has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the AMD EPYC 4464P has 12 cores and 24 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the AMD chip wins the multi-threaded Cinebench R23 test by 3.1%.

Q: Which processor has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Xeon w5-3525 has a substantial advantage. It uses an eight-channel DDR5 memory bus delivering 307.2 GB/s, while the AMD EPYC 4464P uses a dual-channel bus with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the TDP difference between these two CPUs?

A: The Intel Xeon w5-3525 has a TDP of 290 watts, while the AMD EPYC 4464P has a TDP of 65 watts. This is a 225-watt difference in thermal design power.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon w5-3525 and the AMD EPYC 4464P support ECC memory, which is expected for server and workstation parts.

The Verdict

The data directs different buyers toward different chips. The Intel Xeon w5-3525 is the pick for workloads dominated by floating point math, extended instruction sets, and data compression. Its 30% lead in floating point and 25.1% lead in extended instructions make it the stronger choice for scientific computing, financial modeling, or any application that leverages wide vector units. The eight-channel memory system with 307.2 GB/s bandwidth gives Intel a massive memory throughput advantage, which matters for data-intensive tasks. The 16-core configuration provides more raw threads than the AMD part.

The AMD EPYC 4464P wins the majority of tests and offers the better all-around workstation experience for most users. Its 19.7% single-thread lead translates into snappier everyday performance. The 3.1% Cinebench R23 multi-core win shows that 12 Zen 4 cores can outpace 16 Sapphire Rapids cores in rendering workloads. The 36.4% prime number advantage and 14.8% encryption lead point to strong integer performance. The 65-watt TDP versus 290 watts makes the AMD chip far easier to cool and integrate into standard systems. The integrated Radeon Graphics removes the need for a discrete GPU in basic configurations.

For users with PCIe expansion needs, the Intel Xeon w5-3525 offers 112 Gen 5 lanes versus 28, a decisive factor for multi-GPU or high-speed storage arrays. For users prioritizing single-thread speed, power efficiency, and rendering performance, the AMD EPYC 4464P is the data-backed choice. The overall average benchmark scores are close, with the Intel at 67,673 and the AMD at 64,823, but the AMD wins more test categories by wider margins in several key areas.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon w5-3525 | AMD EPYC 4464P |

|---|---|---|

| Manufacturer | Intel | AMD |

| Cores | 16 | 12 |

| Threads | 32 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 3.20 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 5.40 GHz |

| TDP | 290 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 4677 | AMD Socket AM5 |

| Codename | Sapphire Rapids | Raphael |

| Architecture | Sapphire Rapids | Zen 4 |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not listed | 13,140 million |

| Die Size | 4x 477 mm² | 2x 71 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 45 MB | 64 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Eight-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 307.2 GB/s | 83.2 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 112 Lanes | Gen 5, 28 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | N/A | Radeon Graphics |

| Launch MSRP | $1339 | $429 |

| Part Number | SRN77 | 100-000001478 |

| Release Date | 2024-08-23 | 2024-05-20 |