AMD EPYC 4585PX vs Intel Xeon w7-2575X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data tells a decisive story: the AMD EPYC 4585PX wins 16 of 17 head-to-head comparisons against the Intel Xeon w7-2575X, with several victories by very large margins. The single Intel win comes in PassMark floating point math, where the Xeon w7-2575X scores 171,427 against 153,219 for the EPYC, a delta of 10.6%. Every other recorded test favors the AMD part.

The most lopsided results are in PassMark physics and PassMark find prime numbers. In physics, the EPYC 4585PX scores 6,612 versus 2,222 for the Xeon, a 197.6% advantage. In prime number finding, the EPYC scores 547 against 218, a 150.9% delta. These are not marginal differences; they represent a fundamental performance gap in specific computational workloads.

Across the Cinebench suite, the EPYC 4585PX maintains a consistent 36.5% lead in every test. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the EPYC scores 60,451 while the Xeon manages 44,277. The single-core result in R23 is 8,534 versus 6,250, again a 36.5% delta. The same exact percentage appears in R15 and R20, both single and multicore variants, indicating a uniform clock-for-clock advantage rather than workload-specific behavior.

PassMark multithread results show the EPYC at 68,908 versus 52,091 for the Xeon, a 32.3% lead. Single-thread PassMark scores are 4,538 versus 3,300, a 37.5% advantage. Integer math favors the EPYC at 248,563 versus 219,924, a 13% margin. Data encryption shows a 20.2% lead for the EPYC at 47,224 versus 39,295. Random string sorting goes to the EPYC at 95,210 versus 77,986, a 22.1% delta. Data compression is closer, with the EPYC at 884,774 versus 789,817, an 12% edge. Extended instructions also favor the EPYC at 69,457 versus 62,498, an 11.1% lead.

The consistency of the Cinebench deltas is notable: every Cinebench test, regardless of generation or thread count, reports exactly 36.5%. This uniformity suggests the performance ratio between these two processors is stable across rendering workloads that scale with both frequency and core count. The PassMark results are more varied, ranging from an 11.1% advantage in extended instructions to the 197.6% blowout in physics, which indicates the EPYC's architecture handles certain instruction patterns far more efficiently.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 4585PX dominates the majority of workloads in the recorded data, but the Intel Xeon w7-2575X has a genuine strength in floating point math. The Xeon's 171,427 score in PassMark floating point math is its only victory, yet it is a meaningful one for users whose primary workload involves heavy floating point calculations, such as scientific simulations or certain rendering tasks. The 10.6% deficit for the EPYC in this specific test is the only recorded scenario where the Xeon emerges ahead.

For everything else in the database, the EPYC 4585PX is the stronger choice. Rendering workloads, represented by the Cinebench suite, show a consistent 36.5% advantage. Multithreaded productivity tasks, represented by PassMark multithread, show a 32.3% lead. Single-thread responsiveness, represented by PassMark single thread and singlethread, both show a 37.5% advantage. Data compression and encryption tasks favor the EPYC by 12% and 20.2% respectively. Integer math favors the EPYC by 13%. Random string sorting favors the EPYC by 22.1%.

The largest gaps appear in physics and prime number finding, where the EPYC leads by 197.6% and 150.9% respectively. These are the workloads where the architectural differences between the two processors matter most. Users running physics simulations or prime number computations will see more than double the performance on the EPYC.

The average benchmark score in the database places the EPYC 4585PX at 99,324, which ranks in the 97th percentile of all CPUs. The Xeon w7-2575X averages 88,172, ranking in the 96th percentile. The EPYC's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX at 98,504 (0.8% behind the EPYC) and the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D at 97,453 (1.9% behind), while the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX at 101,041 is 1.7% ahead and the AMD EPYC 7513 at 102,244 is 2.9% ahead. The Xeon's nearest rivals are the Intel Xeon 6736P at 87,864 (0.4% behind), the Intel Xeon 6731P at 87,756 (0.5% behind), the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 392 at 90,541 (2.6% ahead), and the Intel Xeon 654 at 90,717 (2.8% ahead).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD EPYC 4585PX uses the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Grado, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It belongs to the EPYC 4005 series and the EPYC (Zen 5 (Grado)) generation. The Intel Xeon w7-2575X uses the Sapphire Rapids codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel, and belongs to the Xeon W (Sapphire Rapids) generation.

Core counts differ significantly. The EPYC 4585PX has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Xeon w7-2575X has 22 cores and 44 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the EPYC achieves higher scores in nearly every test, which points to superior per-core efficiency. The EPYC's base clock is 4.30 GHz with a boost clock of 5.70 GHz, while the Xeon operates at 3.00 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. The EPYC's clocks are substantially higher on both fronts.

Cache configurations also differ. Both processors have 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The L2 cache is 1 MB per core on the EPYC and 2 MB per core on the Xeon. The L3 cache is heavily in the EPYC's favor: 128 MB versus 45 MB. This larger L3 cache likely contributes to the EPYC's advantages in data compression, encryption, and other cache-sensitive workloads.

The process node gap is notable: 4 nm for the EPYC versus 10 nm for the Xeon. The EPYC has 16,630 million transistors across a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². The Xeon's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database. The EPYC's smaller process node and higher clock speeds help explain its performance per core advantage.

Memory support shows a split. Both support DDR5 and ECC memory. The EPYC uses a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Xeon uses a quad-channel bus with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Xeon has a clear memory bandwidth advantage, though the recorded benchmarks do not show this translating into overall performance wins. PCIe connectivity also favors the Xeon: 64 lanes of Gen 5 versus 24 lanes for the EPYC. The EPYC includes integrated Radeon Graphics, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics.

The EPYC 4585PX uses AMD Socket AM5, while the Xeon w7-2575X uses Intel Socket 4677. The EPYC has a locked multiplier, while the Xeon has an unlocked multiplier. The EPYC was released on 2025-05-12, and the Xeon on 2024-08-23. The EPYC's launch MSRP is $699, while the Xeon's launch MSRP is $1689.

The Verdict

The recorded data identifies the AMD EPYC 4585PX as the superior processor for the vast majority of workloads. It wins 16 of 17 head-to-head comparisons, with a 36.5% advantage across all Cinebench tests and a 32.3% lead in PassMark multithread. Users running rendering workloads, data compression, encryption, integer math, physics simulations, or prime number calculations should select the EPYC 4585PX without hesitation. The 197.6% physics lead and 150.9% prime number lead are the strongest arguments in its favor.

The Intel Xeon w7-2575X is the right choice only for workloads that depend heavily on floating point math, where its 171,427 score beats the EPYC's 153,219 by 10.6%. The Xeon also offers more PCIe lanes (64 versus 24) and higher memory bandwidth (153.6 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s), though the recorded benchmarks do not show these advantages producing wins in the tested workloads.

The EPYC achieves its performance with fewer cores: 16 versus 22. This indicates that per-core efficiency, driven by higher clocks and the newer 4 nm process, matters more than raw core count in the recorded benchmarks. The EPYC's 128 MB L3 cache versus 45 MB likely plays a significant role in its cache-sensitive workload wins.

The Xeon's unlocked multiplier and quad-channel memory make it appealing for users who plan to overclock or who need maximum memory bandwidth for specific applications. However, the benchmark data does not record any overclocked results, so the measured performance gap reflects stock configurations.

For most buyers, the EPYC 4585PX is the data-backed recommendation. It outperforms the Xeon in almost every recorded test, often by substantial margins, and it does so with a lower TDP of 170 watts versus 250 watts. The Xeon w7-2575X remains a viable option for floating point oriented workloads, but the evidence strongly favors the AMD part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD EPYC 4585PX has an average benchmark score of 99,324, while the Intel Xeon w7-2575X scores 88,172. The EPYC ranks in the 97th percentile of all CPUs, while the Xeon ranks in the 96th percentile.

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap?

A: The EPYC 4585PX leads by 37.5% in PassMark single-thread tests, scoring 4,538 versus 3,300. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC scores 8,534 versus 6,250, a 36.5% delta.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, the Xeon w7-2575X wins PassMark floating point math with a score of 171,427 versus 153,219 for the EPYC, a 10.6% advantage. This is the only recorded test where the Xeon comes out ahead.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The EPYC 4585PX has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Xeon w7-2575X has 22 cores and 44 threads. The EPYC wins most benchmarks despite having fewer cores.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The EPYC 4585PX has a TDP of 170 watts, while the Xeon w7-2575X has a TDP of 250 watts. The EPYC delivers higher performance with lower power consumption.

Q: Which processor supports more PCIe lanes?

A: The Intel Xeon w7-2575X supports 64 lanes of PCIe Gen 5, while the AMD EPYC 4585PX supports 24 lanes of PCIe Gen 5.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 4585PX | Intel Xeon w7-2575X |

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

| Cores | 16 | 22 |

| Threads | 32 | 44 |

| Base Clock | 4.30 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.70 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 170 W | 250 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel Socket 4677 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Sapphire Rapids |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

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

| L3 Cache | 128 MB | 45 MB |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 153.6 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 24 Lanes | Gen 5, 64 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon Graphics | N/A |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Release Date | 2025-05-12 | 2024-08-23 |

| Launch MSRP | $699 | $1689 |

| Part Number | 100-000001561 | SRN4D |