AMD EPYC 4585PX vs Intel Xeon 6731P Comparison

The AMD EPYC 4585PX and Intel Xeon 6731P occupy different corners of the server and workstation market, and the recorded benchmark data shows a clear split between raw single-thread dominance and specific parallel workloads. The AMD part, a 16-core Zen 5 design, consistently outperforms the 32-core Intel Granite Rapids chip in most tested scenarios, despite the Intel processor having double the core count. This analysis walks through the measured results, focusing on where each processor excels and what the specification sheets reveal.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the database is the single-thread performance gap. In the PassMark single-thread test, the AMD EPYC 4585PX scores 4538 against the Intel Xeon 6731P’s 2107, a delta of 115.4%. This is not a marginal lead; it is a dominant one. The Cinebench single-core tests tell the same story, with the AMD winning R15, R20, and R23 by a consistent 34.7% to 34.8% margin. For the R23 single-core test, the scores are 8534 for AMD and 6334 for Intel. The high clock speeds of the AMD part, with a boost of 5.70 GHz versus 4.10 GHz for Intel, directly explain this advantage.

Moving to multi-core, the AMD EPYC 4585PX continues to lead in Cinebench, but the margins are tighter relative to its core deficit. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, AMD scores 60451 while Intel scores 44871, giving AMD a 34.7% win. The same 34.7% delta appears across R15 and R20 multi-core tests. This is notable because Intel has 32 cores and 64 threads, while AMD has 16 cores and 32 threads. The AMD part’s higher per-core performance, driven by its 4.30 GHz base clock and Zen 5 architecture, overcomes the core count disadvantage in these rendering workloads.

In the PassMark suite, the AMD EPYC 4585PX wins 15 of the 17 recorded benchmarks. The largest wins after single-thread are in integer math and multithread. For integer math, AMD scores 248563 against Intel’s 198761, a 25.1% lead. In the multithread test, AMD scores 68908 versus 52790, a 30.5% advantage. Data compression also favors AMD, with a score of 884774 versus 799474, a 10.7% win. Data encryption shows AMD ahead by 17.8%, with scores of 47224 and 40087 respectively.

The Intel Xeon 6731P does secure two wins in the head-to-head data. The first is in floating-point math, where Intel scores 157330 against AMD’s 153219, a 2.6% margin. The second is in the physics test, where Intel scores 7105 versus AMD’s 6612, a 6.9% lead. These are the only two areas where the Intel part demonstrates a measurable advantage, and both are relatively narrow. In the remaining PassMark tests, such as extended instructions (AMD ahead by 5.8%), random string sorting (AMD ahead by 8.2%), and find prime numbers (AMD ahead by 1.1%), the AMD processor maintains its lead.

Where Each One Wins

The use-case split is defined by the benchmark data. The AMD EPYC 4585PX is the clear choice for workloads that depend on single-thread speed and general integer performance. The 115.4% lead in PassMark single-thread and the 34.7% lead in Cinebench single-core make it suited for applications that are not fully parallelized, such as certain database operations, legacy software, or interactive workloads. Its wins in integer math, data encryption, and data compression also point to strong performance in transactional processing and security-related tasks.

The Intel Xeon 6731P, despite losing most tests, shows its strength in floating-point math and physics simulations. The 2.6% win in floating-point math and the 6.9% win in physics suggest that Intel’s architecture handles these specific numerical workloads better. This could translate to an edge in scientific computing or simulation tasks that rely heavily on floating-point operations, though the margin is modest. For everything else in the recorded data, the AMD part is faster.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-thread score?

A: The AMD EPYC 4585PX. It scores 4538 in the PassMark single-thread test, which is 115.4% higher than the Intel Xeon 6731P’s score of 2107.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon 6731P win any benchmark tests?

A: Yes, it wins two tests. It scores 157330 in PassMark floating-point math, which is 2.6% higher than AMD’s 153219, and it scores 7105 in PassMark physics, which is 6.9% higher than AMD’s 6612.

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

A: The AMD EPYC 4585PX leads in all three Cinebench multi-core tests. In R23, it scores 60451 versus Intel’s 44871, a 34.7% advantage. The same 34.7% delta applies to R15 and R20 multi-core tests.

Q: What is the core count difference?

A: The Intel Xeon 6731P has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the AMD EPYC 4585PX has 16 cores and 32 threads. Despite having half the cores, the AMD part wins the majority of benchmarks.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD EPYC 4585PX has a boost clock of 5.70 GHz, while the Intel Xeon 6731P has a boost clock of 4.10 GHz.

Q: Are both processors in the same market segment?

A: Yes, both are listed under the Server/Workstation market segment in the database, and both support ECC memory.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets show several key differences beyond the core count. The AMD EPYC 4585PX has a base clock of 4.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.70 GHz, while the Intel Xeon 6731P has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. The thermal design power differs significantly: the AMD part is rated at 170 W, while the Intel part is rated at 245 W. The AMD processor uses AMD Socket AM5, while the Intel processor uses Intel Socket 4710.

Memory support also differs. The AMD EPYC 4585PX uses a dual-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Intel Xeon 6731P uses an eight-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 409.6 GB/s. Both support DDR5 and ECC memory. The PCIe configurations are different as well, with the AMD part offering Gen 5 with 24 lanes (CPU only) and the Intel part offering Gen 5 with 136 lanes (CPU only). The AMD processor includes integrated Radeon Graphics, while the Intel processor has no integrated graphics (N/A).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural families. The AMD EPYC 4585PX is based on Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Grado, and belongs to the EPYC 4005 series. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The processor has 16,630 million transistors and a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². Its cache layout includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 128 MB of L3 cache.

The Intel Xeon 6731P is based on Granite Rapids architecture, belonging to the Xeon 6 (Granite Rapids-SP) generation. It is fabricated on a 5 nm process at Intel. The die size is 598 mm². Its cache layout includes 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 144 MB of shared L3 cache. The transistor count is not recorded for the Intel part. The AMD part has a smaller die and a more advanced process node, while the Intel part offers more L3 cache and a larger die. The release dates differ, with the AMD part released on 2025-05-12 and the Intel part released on 2025-02-23.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD EPYC 4585PX as the better performer in the majority of recorded benchmarks. With 15 wins out of 17 head-to-head tests, it covers rendering, integer math, encryption, compression, and single-thread tasks. The 115.4% lead in single-thread performance is the standout metric, making this processor ideal for workloads that cannot fully utilize many cores. Even in multi-core tests, the AMD part leads by 34.7% in Cinebench R23, which is a decisive margin despite having half the cores of the Intel part.

The Intel Xeon 6731P is the choice only for specific floating-point and physics workloads. Its 2.6% win in floating-point math and 6.9% win in physics are the only areas where it outperforms the AMD part. For users with workloads that are heavily dependent on those specific operations, the Intel processor has a narrow edge. However, for all other measured tasks, the AMD EPYC 4585PX provides higher scores. The Intel part does offer more cores, threads, PCIe lanes, and memory bandwidth, but the benchmark data shows that these specifications do not translate into a general performance advantage in the tested scenarios. The AMD processor’s higher clock speeds and architectural efficiency overcome the core count deficit.