AMD EPYC 4545P vs Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the AMD EPYC 4545P and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 is decisively lopsided. The AMD part wins 14 of the 17 recorded tests, with the Intel chip taking only three. The margin of victory in the AMD wins is often substantial, frequently exceeding 60% and in some cases reaching triple-digit percentages.

The most striking result is in data encryption, where the AMD EPYC 4545P scores 37,598 against Intel's 8,798, a delta of 327.3%. This is not a marginal improvement; it is a categorical difference in cryptographic workload throughput. Similarly, in the PassMark find prime numbers test, AMD scores 292 versus Intel's 84, a 247.6% advantage. The physics test shows a 261% delta, with AMD at 3,260 and Intel at 903. These results indicate that the AMD architecture is fundamentally more efficient at executing these specific instruction patterns.

Across the Cinebench suite, the AMD EPYC 4545P maintains a remarkably consistent advantage. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, AMD scores 4,745 against Intel's 2,878, a 64.9% lead. The single-core R15 test shows 669 versus 406, a 64.8% delta. This pattern repeats exactly in R20 (64.8% multi-core, 64.9% single-core) and R23 (64.8% both). The consistency of the delta across all three Cinebench versions suggests a stable architectural efficiency advantage rather than a workload-specific anomaly.

The PassMark multi-thread test amplifies the gap further. AMD scores 53,504 while Intel manages 29,986, a 78.4% delta. Single-thread performance is also heavily skewed: AMD's 4,318 is 85.7% higher than Intel's 2,325. Integer math shows AMD at 213,485 versus 160,322, a 33.2% lead, and floating-point math shows 126,505 against 99,432, a 27.2% advantage.

The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 does claim three wins, all in PassMark sub-tests. Data compression favors Intel at 728,144 versus AMD's 636,279, a 12.6% delta. Extended instructions go to Intel at 51,191 against 46,231, a 9.7% delta. Random string sorting also goes to Intel, 80,208 versus 73,850, a 7.9% delta. These are the only areas where the older Intel silicon demonstrates any advantage, and the margins are comparatively modest.

In aggregate, the AMD EPYC 4545P's average benchmark score is 75,373, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 averages 71,370, in the 94th percentile. While both are high performers, the AMD chip sits slightly higher in the distribution, with its nearest rival being the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 at a 0.2% delta. The Intel part's nearest rival is the Intel Xeon 6511P at a 0.4% delta.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design eras and philosophies. The AMD EPYC 4545P is built on TSMC's 4 nm process node, packing 16,630 million transistors across a dual-die design with each die measuring 70.6 mm². It uses the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Grado, and is part of the EPYC 4005 series. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270, by contrast, uses Intel's 14 nm process with 8,000 million transistors, based on the Cascade Lake architecture, specifically Cascade Lake-SP. This is a generational gap of several process nodes, which explains much of the performance differential.

The core configurations diverge significantly. The AMD EPYC 4545P has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 has 26 cores and 52 threads. Despite having 10 fewer cores and 20 fewer threads, the AMD processor still wins the majority of multi-threaded benchmarks. This is a clear demonstration that per-core efficiency can outweigh raw core count. The AMD chip's base clock is 3.00 GHz with a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, while Intel runs at 2.70 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost. The higher boost clock, combined with newer architecture, gives AMD a decisive edge in single-threaded and lightly-threaded workloads.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The AMD EPYC 4545P provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a massive 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 offers 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, but only 35.75 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD chip has nearly double the L3 capacity, which benefits data-heavy workloads and reduces reliance on slower main memory accesses.

Memory support is another clear differentiator. The AMD EPYC 4545P supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with a recorded bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 supports DDR4, though its memory bus and bandwidth are not recorded in the database. Both processors support ECC memory, a requirement for server and workstation reliability. The AMD chip also includes integrated Radeon Graphics, while the Intel part has no integrated graphics listed.

The sockets differ entirely: AMD uses Socket AM5, while Intel uses Socket 3647. The AMD processor carries a launch MSRP of $549, while no launch price is recorded for the Intel part. The AMD chip was released in May 2025 and remains in active production; the Intel chip was released in December 2018.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD EPYC 4545P dominates. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 6,646 versus Intel's 4,032, a 64.8% delta. The PassMark single-thread test shows 4,318 versus 2,325, an 85.7% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins three PassMark sub-tests: data compression (728,144 vs. 636,279), extended instructions (51,191 vs. 46,231), and random string sorting (80,208 vs. 73,850). However, all three wins are by margins under 13%.

Q: How do the core counts compare, and does it matter?

A: The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 has 26 cores and 52 threads, while the AMD EPYC 4545P has 16 cores and 32 threads. Despite fewer cores, AMD wins the PassMark multi-thread test by 78.4% (53,504 vs. 29,986), showing that core count alone does not determine multi-thread performance.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest delta is in data encryption, where the AMD EPYC 4545P leads by 327.3% (37,598 vs. 8,798). The PassMark find prime numbers test shows a 247.6% gap, and the physics test shows a 261% gap.

Q: What memory technology does each support?

A: The AMD EPYC 4545P supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 supports DDR4 memory, but its bus configuration and bandwidth are not recorded in the database.

Q: Are both processors suitable for server use?

A: Yes. Both are classified in the server/workstation market segment and both support ECC memory. The AMD EPYC 4545P is based on the Zen 5 architecture and is in active production, while the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 uses the older Cascade Lake architecture.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The AMD EPYC 4545P is the superior processor in nearly every meaningful benchmark category. Its average benchmark score of 75,373 places it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 sits at 71,370 in the 94th percentile. The AMD chip wins 14 of 17 head-to-head tests, and its victories are often by wide margins: 64.8% in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 78.4% in PassMark multi-thread, and 85.7% in single-thread performance.

The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 retains a narrow relevance in exactly three workloads: data compression, extended instructions, and random string sorting. Its wins there are modest, between 7.9% and 12.6%. For any workload requiring encryption, prime number calculation, physics simulation, integer or floating-point math, or general multi-threaded and single-threaded compute, the AMD EPYC 4545P is the clear choice based on recorded performance.

The architectural gap explains the results. The AMD chip is built on a 4 nm process with Zen 5 architecture, 64 MB of L3 cache, and DDR5 support. The Intel part uses 14 nm Cascade Lake with 35.75 MB of L3 cache and DDR4. Even with 10 fewer cores and 20 fewer threads, the AMD processor outperforms Intel in multi-threaded tests, proof of its per-core efficiency and newer design.

For a system builder selecting between these two, the AMD EPYC 4545P offers a higher performance ceiling across the vast majority of workloads. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 should only be considered for the specific tasks where it wins, and even then, the margin is small enough that the overall system performance would likely favor AMD in mixed workloads.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 4545P | Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 |

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

| Cores | 16 | 26 |

| Threads | 32 | 52 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 2.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.40 GHz | 4.00 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 205 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel Socket 3647 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Cascade Lake |

| Codename | Grado | Cascade Lake-SP |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 16,630 million | 8,000 million |

| Die Size | 2x 70.6 mm² | Not recorded |

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

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

| L3 Cache | 64 MB | 35.75 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Not recorded |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | Not recorded |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon Graphics | None |

| Release Date | May 2025 | December 2018 |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 4545P is the winner for the overwhelming majority of use cases. Its strengths lie in encryption-heavy workloads, where it is 327.3% faster. Prime number computation, a common operation in cryptography and scientific computing, shows a 247.6% advantage. Physics simulations run 261% faster. For general productivity and development workloads, the 78.4% multi-thread lead and 85.7% single-thread lead make it the better choice for both heavily parallelized tasks and interactive responsiveness.

The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 has a narrow but real niche. Its data compression score of 728,144 versus 636,279 makes it preferable for workloads that spend significant time on compression algorithms, such as archival storage systems or certain database operations. The 9.7% lead in extended instructions suggests better support for specific SIMD or specialized instruction sets. Its random string sorting advantage of 7.9% could benefit certain text processing or data indexing pipelines.

For a server or workstation that runs a diverse mix of workloads, the AMD EPYC 4545P is the better overall investment based on benchmark data. Its 95th percentile ranking, combined with wins across 14 of 17 tests, means it will handle most tasks at higher performance. The Intel part, despite its higher core count, cannot overcome the architectural deficit that the recorded data reveals. Choose Intel only if the specific workload is dominated by compression, extended instructions, or string sorting, and even then, verify that the delta of under 13% justifies the trade-off in every other category.