AMD EPYC 4484PX vs Intel Xeon 6515P Comparison

The AMD EPYC 4484PX and Intel Xeon 6515P represent two distinct approaches to the server/workstation CPU, and the benchmark data reveals a clear, though not absolute, victor. Across 17 head-to-head comparisons, the EPYC 4484PX secures 15 wins, with the Xeon 6515P taking only 2. The AMD part's dominance is most pronounced in single-threaded and physics-based workloads, while Intel's strengths lie firmly in floating-point and extended instruction throughput. This analysis breaks down the numbers to determine which processor suits which workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic divergence between the two CPUs is in single-threaded performance. In the Passmark single-thread test, the EPYC 4484PX scores 4119 against the Xeon's 2855, a massive 44.3% delta. This is not a marginal edge; it is a generational gap in per-core efficiency. This pattern repeats across all Cinebench single-core tests, with the AMD part consistently holding an 11.5% advantage in R15, R20, and an 11.4% edge in R23, scoring 6065 versus 5442. For workloads that rely on low-latency, single-core response, the EPYC 4484PX is unequivocally the superior choice.

In multi-threaded scenarios, the EPYC 4484PX also leads, albeit by a smaller margin. The Cinebench R23 multi-core test shows the AMD part scoring 42964 against Intel's 38547, an 11.5% advantage. This same delta of 11.5% appears in the R15 and R20 multi-core tests, suggesting a consistent architectural performance lead that scales with thread count. The Passmark multithread score reinforces this, with the EPYC 4484PX at 50547 versus the Xeon's 45350, another 11.5% difference. The AMD processor achieves these wins despite having fewer cores (12 vs 16) and threads (24 vs 32), highlighting the impact of its higher clock speeds and cache design.

The Passmark physics test shows the largest multi-threaded gap. Here, the EPYC 4484PX scores 4938, a full 29% ahead of the Xeon's 3829. This specific benchmark often stresses cache hierarchy and core-to-core communication, both areas where the AMD's 128 MB of L3 cache and 3D V-Cache slice provide a distinct benefit. Similarly, in integer math, the EPYC 4484PX scores 162993, a 10.8% lead over Intel's 147047, and in data encryption, it wins by 19.8% (36499 vs 30476). These results indicate that for general server logic, database, and security workloads, the AMD part has a clear performance per clock advantage.

Intel's Xeon 6515P does have two decisive wins, and they are significant. The Passmark floating-point math test is a landslide for Intel, with a score of 128954 compared to AMD's 96446, a 25.2% advantage. This suggests the Granite Rapids architecture has a substantially wider or more efficient FPU pipeline. The second Intel win is in extended instructions, scoring 53383 versus 43315, an 18.9% lead. This indicates that AVX-512 or similar vectorized instruction sets execute with far greater throughput on the Intel part, making it the clear choice for scientific computing, AI inference, and any code that is heavily vectorized.

The remaining tests are closer. In data compression, the EPYC 4484PX wins by a slim 1.8% (603371 vs 592645), and in random string sorting, it wins by 11.2% (71642 vs 64425). The find prime numbers test also goes to AMD by 10.4% (425 vs 385). These results round out a picture where the AMD chip is consistently faster in memory-latency-sensitive and integer-heavy tasks, while Intel's chip dominates only when raw floating-point or specialized instruction throughput is the primary bottleneck.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs are built on fundamentally different platforms, and the data shows the consequences of these design choices. The AMD EPYC 4484PX is a Zen 4 part (codenamed Raphael) built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 2x 71 mm². The Intel Xeon 6515P is a Granite Rapids part built on a 5 nm process at Intel. While both use 5 nm, the transistor counts differ significantly; the AMD part has 17,840 million transistors, while the Intel part's count is not listed.

The most glaring difference is in core configuration and cache. The EPYC 4484PX has 12 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The Xeon 6515P has 16 cores and 32 threads, but its clocks are far lower at 2.30 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost. This explains the AMD's single-thread dominance. The cache hierarchy is equally divergent. AMD provides 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, with a massive 128 MB of shared L3 cache, augmented by a 1x 64MB Slice of 3D V-Cache. Intel provides 112 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2 per core, but only 72 MB of shared L3 cache with no V-Cache. The AMD's larger L3, combined with the V-Cache slice, is the key reason for its 29% lead in the physics test and its edge in integer-heavy workloads.

Memory architecture presents another stark contrast. The EPYC 4484PX uses a dual-channel DDR5 memory bus, providing a theoretical bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The Xeon 6515P uses an eight-channel DDR5 bus, giving it a massive 409.6 GB/s of bandwidth. Despite this 5x difference in memory bandwidth, the AMD part still wins most benchmarks, indicating that its cache is very effective at hiding memory latency for its typical workloads. However, the Intel's bandwidth advantage is likely a major factor in its floating-point win, as those calculations often require streaming large datasets. In terms of connectivity, the Intel part offers 88 Gen 5 lanes versus AMD's 28 lanes, and it also uses a different socket (Intel Socket 4710 vs AMD Socket AM5). The AMD part includes integrated Radeon Graphics, while the Intel has N/A.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-threaded performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 4484PX is significantly faster. In the Passmark single-thread test, it scores 4119, which is 44.3% higher than the Intel Xeon 6515P's score of 2855.

Q: Is the Intel Xeon 6515P better at any computing task?

A: Yes. The benchmark data shows it is substantially better at floating-point math, scoring 128954 versus 96446 for the AMD, a 25.2% advantage. It also wins in extended instructions by a margin of 18.9%.

Q: How does the core count affect the multi-threaded results?

A: Despite having fewer cores (12 vs 16) and threads (24 vs 32), the AMD EPYC 4484PX wins all multi-threaded tests, including Cinebench R23 (42964 vs 38547) and Passmark multithread (50547 vs 45350). Its higher clock speeds and larger cache compensate for the deficit in core count.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Xeon 6515P has a theoretical memory bandwidth of 409.6 GB/s thanks to its eight-channel memory bus, while the AMD EPYC 4484PX has a dual-channel bus providing 83.2 GB/s. Despite this, the AMD chip wins most benchmarks.

Q: Which CPU has a larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD EPYC 4484PX has a shared 128 MB L3 cache, plus an additional 1x 64MB Slice of 3D V-Cache. The Intel Xeon 6515P has a smaller shared 72 MB L3 cache.

Q: What are the launch MSRPs for these CPUs?

A: The AMD EPYC 4484PX has a launch MSRP of $599, and the Intel Xeon 6515P has a launch MSRP of $740.

Specification Differences

The following table outlines the key specifications where the two processors differ.

| Specification | AMD EPYC 4484PX | Intel Xeon 6515P |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Cores | 12 | 16 |

| Threads | 24 | 32 |

| Base Clock | 4.40 GHz | 2.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.60 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| TDP | 120 W | 150 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel Socket 4710 |

| Codename | Raphael | Granite Rapids |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 17,840 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 2x 71 mm² | Not listed |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 112 KB (per core) |

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

| L3 Cache | 128 MB (shared) | 72 MB (shared) |

| 3D V-Cache | 1x 64MB Slice | N/A |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | 409.6 GB/s |

| PCIe Lanes | Gen 5, 28 Lanes | Gen 5, 88 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon Graphics | N/A |

| Launch MSRP | $599 | $740 |

The Verdict

The data presents a clear choice for most general server and workstation workloads: the AMD EPYC 4484PX. It is faster in single-threaded tasks by up to 44.3%, wins all multi-threaded content creation and integer benchmarks by roughly 11%, and secures a 29% victory in physics processing. Its lower TDP of 120 W versus Intel's 150 W, combined with a lower launch MSRP ($599 vs $740), makes it the stronger contender for database serving, code compilation, and general virtualization, where its cache and clock speed advantages are decisive.

The Intel Xeon 6515P is not without merit, but its strengths are narrow. It is the definitive choice for workloads that are heavily dependent on floating-point math or that can leverage extended instruction sets (like AVX-512). Its 25.2% lead in floating-point performance and 18.9% lead in extended instructions make it a better fit for scientific simulations, financial modeling, and certain AI/ML inference tasks where data is processed in vectors. Furthermore, its 409.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth and 88 PCIe Gen 5 lanes provide superior I/O and data streaming capabilities for high-performance storage systems.

In summary, the AMD EPYC 4484PX is the superior all-around server processor, delivering higher performance in the vast majority of benchmarked scenarios. The Intel Xeon 6515P is a specialist, trading general-purpose speed for exceptional throughput in a specific, but important, class of numerical workloads. The choice between them hinges entirely on whether the workload is dominated by integer/logic operations or floating-point/vector math.