AMD EPYC 4584PX vs Intel Xeon w7-2575X Comparison

The Intel Xeon w7-2575X and AMD EPYC 4584PX occupy the same high-end workstation tier, both sitting at the 96th percentile of all CPUs, yet their benchmark profiles could hardly be more different. The AMD part wins 13 of 17 head-to-head comparisons, but the Intel chip counters with decisive victories in specific math workloads. This is a study in architectural philosophy: one processor leans on raw core counts and memory bandwidth, while the other leverages higher clocks and a massive L3 cache to dominate everything else.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon w7-2575X has 22 cores and 44 threads, while the AMD EPYC 4584PX has 16 cores and 32 threads. Despite the core deficit, the AMD chip still wins the Cinebench multicore tests by 14.1%.

Q: How do their single-core performances compare?

A: The AMD EPYC 4584PX leads in every single-core benchmark. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 7274 versus the Intel's 6250, a 14.1% advantage. PassMark single-thread results show a similar gap: 3795 versus 3300, a 13% difference.

Q: What is the difference in cache sizes?

A: The AMD EPYC 4584PX features 128 MB of shared L3 cache plus one 64 MB 3D V-Cache slice, whereas the Intel Xeon w7-2575X has 45 MB of L3 cache. The AMD part also has smaller per-core L1 (64 KB vs 80 KB) and L2 (1 MB vs 2 MB) caches.

Q: Which processor has higher clock speeds?

A: The AMD EPYC 4584PX has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.70 GHz. The Intel Xeon w7-2575X operates at 3.00 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. The AMD part’s clocks are substantially higher.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each support?

A: The Intel Xeon w7-2575X supports quad-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. The AMD EPYC 4584PX uses dual-channel DDR5, delivering 83.2 GB/s. The Intel part offers nearly double the memory bandwidth.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for these CPUs?

A: The AMD EPYC 4584PX has a TDP of 120 watts, while the Intel Xeon w7-2575X is rated at 250 watts. The AMD chip achieves higher performance while consuming less than half the thermal budget.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent distinct design lineages. The Intel Xeon w7-2575X is built on Sapphire Rapids architecture using a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. It packs 22 cores with 44 threads, each core carrying 80 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2 cache. The shared L3 pool is 45 MB. This chip relies on a quad-channel DDR5 memory bus to reach 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth and provides 64 PCIe Gen 5 lanes.

The AMD EPYC 4584PX comes from the EPYC 4004 series, based on Zen 4 architecture codenamed Raphael. It uses TSMC's 5 nm process and integrates 17,840 million transistors across two 71 mm² dies. Each of its 16 cores has 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 cache. The L3 cache is a substantial 128 MB shared pool, augmented by a dedicated 1x 64 MB 3D V-Cache slice. Memory support is dual-channel DDR5, yielding 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth, with 28 PCIe Gen 5 lanes.

These structural choices explain the benchmark divergence. The Intel part’s larger core count and superior memory bandwidth should favor throughput-heavy tasks. The AMD part counters with higher clocks—4.20 GHz base versus 3.00 GHz, and 5.70 GHz boost versus 4.80 GHz—plus a much larger cache hierarchy for latency-sensitive workloads. The Intel chip has an unlocked multiplier, whereas the AMD multiplier is locked. Both support ECC memory and target the server/workstation segment, but the AMD part includes integrated Radeon Graphics while the Intel has none.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD EPYC 4584PX dominates the Cinebench suite with remarkable consistency. Across all six Cinebench tests—R15, R20, and R23, both single and multicore—the AMD part wins by exactly 14.1%. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the AMD scores 51524 versus the Intel’s 44277. Single-core R23 shows 7274 versus 6250. This uniformity suggests a fundamental clock-speed advantage rather than workload-specific optimization.

The story shifts in Passmark’s math workloads. The Intel Xeon w7-2575X takes floating point math with a score of 171427, a commanding 41.1% lead over the AMD’s 121460. It also wins integer math (219924 versus 201919, an 8.9% margin) and extended instructions (62498 versus 53774, a 16.2% advantage). Data compression also favors Intel, with 789817 versus 741648, a 6.5% win.

The AMD EPYC 4584PX fights back in other Passmark tests. Its find prime numbers score of 441 is more than double the Intel’s 218, a 50.6% improvement. Physics tests show a 51.4% lead (4574 versus 2222). Data encryption goes to AMD by 14.4% (45902 versus 39295). Random string sorting favors AMD by 11.1% (87690 versus 77986). The Passmark multithread score is AMD’s, 58117 versus 52091, a 10.4% margin. Single-thread Passmark also goes to AMD, 3795 versus 3300.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon w7-2575X | AMD EPYC 4584PX |

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

| Cores | 22 | 16 |

| Threads | 44 | 32 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 5.70 GHz |

| TDP | 250 W | 120 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 4677 | AMD Socket AM5 |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

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

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

| L3 Cache | 45 MB | 128 MB (shared) + 1x 64 MB V-Cache |

| Memory Bus | Quad-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 153.6 GB/s | 83.2 GB/s |

| PCIe Lanes | 64 (Gen 5) | 28 (Gen 5) |

| Integrated Graphics | N/A | Radeon Graphics |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Launch MSRP | $1689 | $699 |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon w7-2575X is the clear choice for workloads that stress memory bandwidth and parallel math operations. Its floating point advantage of 41.1% over the AMD part is substantial, making it suited for scientific computing, simulation, and any application that relies heavily on FPU throughput. The integer math win of 8.9% and extended instructions lead of 16.2% further cement its position for complex numerical processing. Data compression also lands in Intel’s favor, which could benefit database and storage-related tasks.

The AMD EPYC 4584PX excels in almost everything else. Its single-core performance is superior across both Cinebench and Passmark, making it the better option for lightly threaded applications and responsiveness. The physics test advantage of 51.4% suggests strong performance in real-time simulation or gaming-adjacent workloads. The find prime numbers result, at double the Intel score, points to exceptional performance in encryption-related or number-theoretic tasks. Random string sorting and data encryption also favor AMD, indicating strengths in data manipulation and security workloads.

The overall multithread Passmark score favors AMD by 10.4%, and the Cinebench multicore tests all favor AMD by 14.1%, despite the Intel part having six more cores. This suggests that clock speed and cache design matter more than raw core counts in these particular benchmarks.

The Verdict

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput in floating-point-heavy scientific or engineering applications, the Intel Xeon w7-2575X is the data-backed choice. Its 41.1% lead in floating point math and 16.2% advantage in extended instructions make it hard to beat for those specific tasks. The quad-channel memory interface, delivering 153.6 GB/s, provides the bandwidth such workloads demand.

For virtually every other scenario, the AMD EPYC 4584PX is the superior processor. It wins 13 of 17 benchmarks, including all Cinebench tests, all single-thread tests, and the overall multithread Passmark score. Its higher clocks and massive 128 MB L3 cache plus V-Cache slice deliver wins even in multicore tests where it has fewer cores. The lower TDP of 120 watts versus 250 watts also means less heat and power consumption. Given that the AMD part also carries a lower launch MSRP of $699 versus $1689, the data suggests it is the more broadly capable processor for general workstation use. The Intel part remains relevant only for the specific niches where its math and memory bandwidth advantages shine.