CPU Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7232P and Intel Xeon E5-4669 v3 represent two very different approaches to server processing, separated by four years of architectural evolution. The EPYC 7232P, a Zen 2-based Rome part on TSMC's 7 nm node, faces off against the older 22 nm Haswell-EP Xeon. Despite the Xeon's massive core-count advantage, the benchmark data reveals a remarkably close contest, with the AMD chip winning all six head-to-head tests by a narrow but consistent margin. The data shows a modern, efficient 8-core processor edging out a legacy 18-core behemoth across every Cinebench iteration, from R15 to R23.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern in the head-to-head results is the uniformity of the AMD EPYC 7232P's victories. Across all six Cinebench tests, the EPYC 7232P wins with a deltaPct of 1.6% in five instances and 1.9% in one, never deviating far from that narrow band. This consistency suggests the architectural advantages of Zen 2 are being applied evenly across both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7232P scores 1517 against the Xeon E5-4669 v3's 1493, a 1.6% advantage. The single-core R15 result shows a slightly larger gap: 214 versus 210, a 1.9% delta. This single-core margin is telling, as the Xeon's Haswell architecture from 2015 was never known for strong per-clock performance, and the EPYC's 3.10 GHz base clock versus the Xeon's 2.10 GHz base clock helps explain the edge.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern holds. The multi-core score sees the EPYC 7232P at 6323 and the Xeon at 6222, again a 1.6% difference. The R20 single-core test produces 892 versus 878, maintaining that same 1.6% delta. These results are particularly notable because the Xeon E5-4669 v3 has more than double the core count, 18 cores and 36 threads versus 8 cores and 16 threads, yet still cannot overcome the EPYC's superior per-core throughput and higher clocks.

Cinebench R23 reinforces the narrative. The EPYC 7232P delivers 15055 multi-core points against the Xeon's 14815, a 1.6% lead. In single-core R23, the scores are 2125 and 2091 respectively, again 1.6% apart. The fact that the AMD chip, with 10 fewer cores and 20 fewer threads, can match and slightly exceed the Xeon in multi-threaded workloads speaks volumes about the efficiency of the Zen 2 architecture. The 7 nm process node, the 32 MB total L3 cache, and the eight-channel memory bus all contribute to this performance parity.

Benchmark results also indicate where the EPYC 7232P sits against its broader competition. Its average benchmark score of 4354 places it in the 58th percentile of all CPUs, with its nearest rival being the Intel Xeon E-2288G at 4373, a delta of -0.4%. The Xeon E5-4669 v3, with an average score of 4285, also sits in the 58th percentile, but its nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5750G at 4296, a -0.3% delta. Both processors are statistically indistinguishable from their closest competitors, yet the head-to-head data consistently favors the EPYC 7232P.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear, if narrow, victory for the AMD EPYC 7232P. It wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, from the older Cinebench R15 to the more demanding R23, across both single-core and multi-core workloads. The margins are slim, never exceeding 1.9%, but they are absolute. For workloads that rely on Cinebench-style rendering, the EPYC 7232P is the better performer.

However, the choice depends heavily on context. The Xeon E5-4669 v3, despite losing every head-to-head test, is not without merit. Its 18 cores and 36 threads provide more raw thread count, which could be beneficial in heavily parallelized server workloads that scale beyond 16 threads, even if Cinebench results show the EPYC 7232P handling the same tasks slightly faster. The Xeon also offers a shared 45 MB L3 cache, which is larger than the EPYC's 32 MB total L3, potentially aiding in cache-sensitive applications.

For buyers prioritizing single-threaded performance, the EPYC 7232P is the obvious pick. Its 3.20 GHz boost clock and Zen 2 architecture deliver superior results in every single-core test. For those needing sheer thread count in a legacy platform, the Xeon E5-4669 v3 remains a viable option, though its end-of-life production status and 22 nm process node suggest it is a dated choice. The EPYC 7232P, by contrast, is still in active production, offering a modern platform with PCIe Gen 4 support and 128 lanes versus the Xeon's Gen 3 and 40 lanes.

The data cannot justify picking the Xeon based on performance alone. It loses all six head-to-head tests. The only reasons to choose it would be platform compatibility or the need for 18 physical cores, which are not reflected in the benchmark results. Strictly from the numbers, the AMD EPYC 7232P is the superior processor.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The AMD EPYC 7232P wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, with wins in R15, R20, and R23, each in both single-core and multi-core configurations.

Q: How much faster is the AMD EPYC 7232P in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The EPYC 7232P scores 15055 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 1.6% higher than the Xeon E5-4669 v3's 14815.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two processors?

A: The AMD EPYC 7232P has an average benchmark score of 4354, while the Intel Xeon E5-4669 v3 has an average score of 4285, a difference of 69 points.

Q: Does the Xeon E5-4669 v3 have more cores than the EPYC 7232P?

A: Yes, the Intel Xeon E5-4669 v3 has 18 cores and 36 threads, while the AMD EPYC 7232P has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD EPYC 7232P has a boost clock of 3.20 GHz, compared to the Intel Xeon E5-4669 v3's boost clock of 2.90 GHz.

Q: What is the production status of each processor?

A: The AMD EPYC 7232P is listed as active in production, while the Intel Xeon E5-4669 v3 is listed as end-of-life.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ fundamentally in their specifications, starting with the core and thread counts. The AMD EPYC 7232P offers 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Xeon E5-4669 v3 provides 18 cores and 36 threads. Clock speeds also diverge significantly: the EPYC has a base clock of 3.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz, whereas the Xeon operates at 2.10 GHz base and 2.90 GHz boost.

Thermal design power differs by 15 watts, with the EPYC 7232P rated at 120 W TDP and the Xeon at 135 W TDP. The sockets are incompatible: the AMD chip uses AMD Socket SP3, while the Intel chip uses Intel Socket 2011-3. Memory channels also differ, with the EPYC supporting eight-channel DDR4 and the Xeon supporting quad-channel DDR4, leading to a memory bandwidth disparity of 85.3 GB/s versus 68.3 GB/s.

PCIe capabilities show a generation gap. The EPYC 7232P supports PCIe Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only), while the Xeon supports PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes (CPU only). Cache configurations vary as well: the EPYC has 512 KB of L2 cache per core and 32 MB of total L3 cache, while the Xeon has 256 KB of L2 cache per core and a shared 45 MB L3 cache. The launch MSRP for the EPYC 7232P is $450, while the Xeon E5-4669 v3 launched with an MSRP of $7007.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two processors is substantial. The AMD EPYC 7232P is built on the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Rome, and represents the EPYC 7002 series generation. It leverages a 7 nm process node from TSMC, with a transistor count of 7,600 million and a die size of 2x 74 mm². This modern design enables higher clock speeds and better power efficiency, as evidenced by its 120 W TDP despite the robust performance.

In contrast, the Intel Xeon E5-4669 v3 uses the Haswell architecture, specifically Haswell-EP, from the Xeon E5 generation. It is fabricated on Intel's 22 nm process node, with a die size of 662 mm². The process node difference is stark: 7 nm versus 22 nm, representing multiple generations of manufacturing advancement. This explains why the EPYC 7232P can achieve comparable or better performance with fewer cores and lower power consumption.

The cache hierarchy also reflects architectural choices. The EPYC 7232P has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of L3 per die, totaling 32 MB. The Xeon E5-4669 v3 has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 45 MB L3 cache. The EPYC's larger per-core L2 cache and the Xeon's larger shared L3 cache represent different strategies for data locality and inter-core communication.

Memory architecture further distinguishes the two. The EPYC 7232P supports eight-channel DDR4 memory, yielding a theoretical bandwidth of 85.3 GB/s, while the Xeon supports quad-channel DDR4 with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth. Both processors support ECC memory, which is critical for server reliability. The EPYC's newer PCIe Gen 4 interface offers double the bandwidth per lane compared to the Xeon's PCIe Gen 3, and its 128 lanes far exceed the Xeon's 40 lanes, making the EPYC far more suitable for high-throughput I/O workloads. Neither processor includes integrated graphics, and both have locked multipliers, but the EPYC's active production status and 2019 release date contrast with the Xeon's end-of-life status and 2015 launch.