AMD EPYC 4565P vs Intel Xeon 6736P Comparison

The AMD EPYC 4565P and Intel Xeon 6736P are both 96th percentile processors in the database, yet they deliver sharply different strengths. The EPYC 4565P wins 14 of the 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks, while the Xeon 6736P takes three. The split is not about total capability but about workload character: the AMD part dominates single-thread, rendering, and general integer work, while the Intel part pulls ahead in physics simulation, prime-number finding, and string sorting. Choosing between them means deciding which kind of server or workstation duty matters more.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 4565P is the clear winner for latency-sensitive and lightly threaded tasks. Its single-thread PassMark score of 4712 is more than double the Xeon’s 2024, a 132.8% advantage. That gap carries into every Cinebench single-core test, where the AMD part leads by 27.8% to 27.9%. For database transactions, application servers, or any workload where a single core is the bottleneck, the EPYC 4565P is the stronger pick. It also wins all three Cinebench multi-core tests by 27.8%, plus PassMark integer math by 21.2%, extended instructions by 15.8%, and data compression by 8%. Its 64 MB of shared L3 cache and 4.30 GHz base clock make it a general-purpose workhorse.

The Intel Xeon 6736P wins where raw core count and memory bandwidth translate into parallel throughput on specific algorithms. Its PassMark physics score of 6531 crushes the EPYC’s 2976, a 54.4% margin. It also leads in random string sorting, scoring 103723 against 81318, a 21.6% advantage, and in finding prime numbers, 392 versus 294, a 25% edge. These are workloads that scale with the Xeon’s 36 cores and 72 threads, and they benefit from its eight-channel DDR5 memory bus delivering 409.6 GB/s. If the application is physics simulation, sorting large datasets, or number-theory computation, the Xeon 6736P is the better fit.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD EPYC 4565P uses Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with a die size of 2x 70.6 mm² and 16,630 million transistors. It is built for high clock speeds: a 4.30 GHz base and 5.70 GHz boost. It has 16 cores and 32 threads, with 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3. Memory support is dual-channel DDR5, yielding 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The CPU provides 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and it includes Radeon Graphics as integrated graphics, which is unusual for a server part.

The Intel Xeon 6736P uses Granite Rapids architecture on a 5 nm Intel process, with a much larger monolithic die of 598 mm². It has 36 cores and 72 threads, running at a 2.00 GHz base and 4.10 GHz boost. Cache is larger per core: 112 KB of L1, 2 MB of L2, and a 144 MB shared L3. Memory support is eight-channel DDR5, pushing bandwidth to 409.6 GB/s. It offers 88 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, more than triple the AMD part, but has no integrated graphics. The Xeon targets memory-heavy and core-scalable workloads, while the AMD part prioritizes frequency and per-core efficiency.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic result is PassMark single-thread, where the EPYC 4565P scores 4712 against the Xeon’s 2024. That 132.8% delta is the largest in the entire comparison and explains why the AMD part feels faster in interactive or latency-bound tasks. Cinebench R23 single-core confirms the pattern: 7680 for AMD versus 6008 for Intel, a 27.8% lead. All three Cinebench multi-core tests show the same 27.8% margin, with R23 multi-core at 54405 versus 42561, R20 at 22850 versus 17875, and R15 at 5484 versus 4290.

In PassMark integer math, the EPYC 4565P scores 250683 versus 206833, a 21.2% advantage. Extended instructions favor AMD by 15.8%, with scores of 64345 versus 55563. Data compression is closer, 860786 versus 796658, an 8% edge for AMD. Floating-point math is nearly tied, 152003 versus 149770, a 1.5% margin. Data encryption also goes to AMD, 48268 versus 46236, a 4.4% difference. PassMark multi-thread sums up the general trend: 63474 for AMD versus 50072 for Intel, a 26.8% lead.

The Xeon 6736P fights back in three specific tests. Physics is its biggest win, 6531 versus 2976, a 54.4% advantage. Random string sorting goes to Intel, 103723 versus 81318, a 21.6% lead. Prime-number finding favors Intel, 392 versus 294, a 25% edge. These results suggest the Xeon’s many cores and high memory bandwidth excel at workloads with heavy parallel branching or large data movement, even though its lower clock speeds hurt it elsewhere.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ on nearly every specification that matters for platform design. Core count is the most obvious split: 16 cores and 32 threads for AMD, 36 cores and 72 threads for Intel. Clock speeds are inverted, with AMD at 4.30 GHz base and 5.70 GHz boost, versus Intel at 2.00 GHz base and 4.10 GHz boost. Thermal design power differs by 35 watts, with AMD at 170 and Intel at 205. Process node and foundry also differ: 4 nm TSMC for AMD, 5 nm Intel for the Xeon. Die size is dramatically different, 2x 70.6 mm² for AMD versus 598 mm² for Intel, reflecting the Xeon’s larger core count and cache.

Cache hierarchy is distinct. AMD provides 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 64 MB shared L3. Intel provides 112 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 144 MB shared L3. Memory channels and bandwidth are the biggest platform gap: AMD has dual-channel DDR5 at 89.6 GB/s, while Intel has eight-channel DDR5 at 409.6 GB/s, a 4.6x bandwidth advantage. PCIe lane count also diverges, with AMD offering 24 Gen 5 lanes and Intel offering 88 Gen 5 lanes. Integrated graphics are present on AMD but absent on Intel. Socket and release date differ as well, with AMD on Socket AM5 released 2025-05-12 and Intel on Socket 4710 released 2025-02-23. Both support ECC memory, both are active production parts, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The launch MSRP for the AMD EPYC 4565P is $589. The launch MSRP for the Intel Xeon 6736P is $3351.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD EPYC 4565P is far ahead, scoring 4712 in PassMark single-thread versus 2024 for the Intel Xeon 6736P, a 132.8% difference. Cinebench R23 single-core confirms this with 7680 versus 6008, a 27.8% lead.

Q: Why does the Intel Xeon 6736P win in physics tests?

A: The Xeon’s 36 cores and 72 threads, combined with its eight-channel DDR5 memory at 409.6 GB/s, let it scale better on parallel branching workloads. It scores 6531 in PassMark physics versus 2976 for the AMD part, a 54.4% advantage.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Intel Xeon 6736P supports eight-channel DDR5 with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the AMD EPYC 4565P uses dual-channel DDR5 at 89.6 GB/s. This is a major factor in the Xeon’s wins on sorting and prime-number tests.

Q: Which CPU has more PCIe lanes?

A: The Intel Xeon 6736P provides 88 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), compared to 24 lanes on the AMD EPYC 4565P. This matters for systems with many GPUs or high-speed storage devices.

Q: How do the multi-core Cinebench scores compare?

A: The AMD EPYC 4565P wins all three multi-core tests by 27.8%. In Cinebench R23, it scores 54405 versus 42561 for the Intel Xeon 6736P. R20 results are 22850 versus 17875, and R15 results are 5484 versus 4290.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: Only the AMD EPYC 4565P has integrated Radeon Graphics. The Intel Xeon 6736P has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU for display output.