AMD EPYC 4545P vs Intel Xeon 6511P Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the AMD EPYC 4545P and the Intel Xeon 6511P shows a clear split in workload types. The AMD part wins 12 of the 17 recorded tests, while the Intel part wins 5. The scale of those wins, however, is heavily tilted toward AMD.

In the Cinebench suite, AMD is consistently ahead by 14.3% across all three versions, both single-core and multi-core. The R15 multi-core score is 4745 versus 4152, the R20 multi-core is 19773 versus 17302, and the R23 multi-core is 47079 versus 41196. Single-core results follow the same pattern: R15 shows 669 versus 586, R20 shows 2791 versus 2442, and R23 shows 6646 versus 5815. Every Cinebench delta is exactly 14.3%, which indicates a uniform clock and IPC advantage rather than a workload-specific one.

The PassMark suite reveals a more nuanced picture. The largest AMD win comes in single-thread performance, where the EPYC 4545P scores 4318 against the Xeon's 2545, a 69.7% advantage. Integer math also heavily favors AMD: 213485 versus 162524, a 31.4% lead. Data encryption is another AMD win at 37598 versus 31429, a 19.6% margin. The multi-thread PassMark score goes to AMD at 53504 versus 45687, a 17.1% edge. Random string sorting is closer, with AMD ahead by 8.9% (73850 versus 67809).

The Intel Xeon 6511P takes its wins in more specialized areas. Its largest victory is in physics simulation, scoring 4678 against AMD's 3260, a 30.3% lead. Extended instructions go to Intel at 50730 versus 46231, an 8.9% advantage. Prime number finding is a narrow Intel win at 308 versus 292, a 5.2% margin. Floating point math is nearly tied, with Intel at 127307 versus AMD's 126505, just 0.6% ahead. Data compression also slightly favors Intel at 640808 versus 636279, a 0.7% edge.

The overall average benchmark score tells a similar story. The EPYC 4545P posts an average of 75373, while the Xeon 6511P averages 71051. That places AMD in the 95th percentile of all CPUs and Intel in the 94th. The AMD chip's nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285, sits at 75488, just 0.2% higher, meaning the EPYC 4545P is effectively at parity with that desktop part. The Xeon 6511P's nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K at 70879, is 0.2% below it, while the Xeon Platinum 8270 is 0.4% below.

Architecture Differences

The two processors take fundamentally different approaches to the same 16-core, 32-thread configuration. The AMD EPYC 4545P uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4nm TSMC process, with a die size of 2x 70.6 mm² and 16,630 million transistors. It is part of the EPYC 4005 series and carries the codename Grado. The Intel Xeon 6511P, by contrast, uses Granite Rapids on Intel's 5nm process, with no transistor count or die size recorded in the database.

Clock speeds diverge sharply. AMD lists a 3.00 GHz base and a 5.40 GHz boost, while Intel lists 2.30 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost. That 1.2 GHz difference in boost clocks explains much of the single-thread gap. The TDP figures are also far apart: AMD draws 65 watts, Intel draws 150 watts. Both are locked multipliers and both are active production parts.

Cache hierarchy differs in structure. AMD provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of L3. Intel provides 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 72 MB of shared L3. So Intel has more per-core cache and more total L3, yet still loses in most throughput tests.

Memory support is where Intel makes its biggest architectural statement. Both support DDR5, but AMD uses a dual-channel bus delivering 89.6 GB/s, while Intel uses an eight-channel bus delivering 409.6 GB/s. That is a 4.6x bandwidth advantage for Intel. Both support ECC memory. PCIe lanes also differ: AMD offers Gen 5 with 24 CPU lanes, Intel offers Gen 5 with 136 CPU lanes.

The integrated graphics situation is one-sided. AMD includes Radeon Graphics, while Intel lists N/A. This makes the AMD part more self-contained for basic display output, though neither is marketed primarily for graphics.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 4545P wins in scenarios dominated by single-thread speed, integer arithmetic, encryption, and general multi-threaded throughput. The 69.7% single-thread lead means any workload that cannot parallelize well will strongly prefer AMD. Integer math at 31.4% ahead suggests databases, compilers, and general business logic will run faster. Encryption at 19.6% ahead points to secure communications and storage workloads. The 17.1% multi-thread PassMark win, combined with the 14.3% Cinebench sweep, indicates that even fully threaded rendering and simulation tasks prefer AMD despite Intel's higher memory bandwidth.

The Intel Xeon 6511P wins in physics simulation, extended instruction sets, prime number finding, floating point math, and data compression. The 30.3% physics lead is its most decisive victory, likely reflecting the AVX-512-style instruction throughput and the larger L3 cache. The 8.9% extended instructions win suggests workloads that use specialized SIMD paths will favor Intel. The narrow floating point and compression wins, though small, indicate that Intel's memory bandwidth advantage helps in streaming, data-dense tasks. Prime number finding, a classic cache-sensitive workload, also goes Intel's way.

The split is clean: AMD wins where clocks and IPC dominate, Intel wins where cache capacity, memory bandwidth, and wide vector units matter. For a typical server mix of web serving, application logic, and encryption, AMD looks stronger. For high-performance computing, simulation, and data compression pipelines, Intel has a case.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD EPYC 4545P as the better general-purpose processor. It wins 12 of 17 benchmarks, holds a higher average score (75373 versus 71051), and occupies a higher percentile (95 versus 94). The single-thread advantage is enormous, and the multi-thread Cinebench results are consistently 14.3% better. For most server workloads that involve mixed instruction streams, the AMD part will finish tasks sooner.

The Intel Xeon 6511P is the choice only for specific workloads. If the application relies heavily on physics simulation, wide extended instructions, or data compression, Intel's wins are real but narrow, except for the physics case. The 409.6 GB/s memory bandwidth versus 89.6 GB/s is a structural advantage that may pay off in memory-bound code, but the recorded benchmarks show only modest gains in such areas (floating point 0.6%, compression 0.7%). The 150-watt TDP versus 65 watts is a significant operating cost difference that the performance data does not fully justify.

For a buyer who values raw throughput per thread, encryption, and integer work, the EPYC 4545P is the clear pick. For a buyer who needs eight-channel memory and the highest possible physics or extended-vector performance, the Xeon 6511P has a specific role. The overall database ranking supports AMD.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-thread performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 4545P scores 4318 in PassMark single-thread, versus 2545 for the Intel Xeon 6511P, a 69.7% advantage. Cinebench single-core results also favor AMD by 14.3% across all versions.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon 6511P win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins 5 of 17 head-to-head tests: physics (4678 versus 3260, a 30.3% lead), extended instructions (50730 versus 46231, an 8.9% lead), prime number finding (308 versus 292, a 5.2% lead), floating point math (127307 versus 126505, a 0.6% lead), and data compression (640808 versus 636279, a 0.7% lead).

Q: How do the memory bandwidth specifications compare?

A: The Intel Xeon 6511P uses an eight-channel DDR5 bus with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD EPYC 4545P uses a dual-channel DDR5 bus with 89.6 GB/s. Both support ECC memory.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The AMD EPYC 4545P has a 65-watt TDP, while the Intel Xeon 6511P has a 150-watt TDP. This is a 85-watt difference in rated thermal design power.

Q: Which CPU has more L3 cache?

A: The Intel Xeon 6511P has 72 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD EPYC 4545P has 64 MB of L3. Intel also has larger per-core L1 (112 KB versus 80 KB) and L2 (2 MB versus 1 MB) caches.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: No. The AMD EPYC 4545P includes Radeon Graphics, while the Intel Xeon 6511P lists integrated graphics as N/A.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 4545P | Intel Xeon 6511P |

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

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Granite Rapids |

| Codename | Grado | Granite Rapids |

| Process node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 5 nm (Intel) |

| Base clock | 3.00 GHz | 2.30 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.40 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 150 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel Socket 4710 |

| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 112 KB (per core) |

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

| L3 cache | 64 MB | 72 MB (shared) |

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Eight-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 409.6 GB/s |

| PCIe lanes | Gen 5, 24 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 136 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon Graphics | N/A |

| Launch MSRP | $549 | $815 |

| Part number | 100-000001764 | SRVU9 |