CPU Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7251 and Intel Xeon E-2276G represent two distinct approaches to server processing, separated by two years of release timing and fundamentally different design philosophies. The data shows a clean sweep in the Cinebench suite for the AMD part, yet the Xeon counters with a higher boost clock, integrated graphics, and a lower thermal design power. This analysis walks through the benchmark results, architectural choices, and specification differences to determine which processor suits which workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkably consistent: the AMD EPYC 7251 wins all six Cinebench comparisons, with every victory falling between 6.1% and 6.5%. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the EPYC scores 1279 against the Xeon's 1205, a 6.1% advantage. The single-core R15 test shows the EPYC at 180 versus 169, a 6.5% lead, the largest margin in the entire comparison. This pattern repeats across newer versions: R20 multicore shows 5331 against 5021 (6.2% delta), and R20 single-core shows 752 against 708 (6.2%). The R23 tests mirror this exactly, with multicore at 12694 versus 11957 and single-core at 1792 versus 1688, both again at 6.2%.

The consistency of these deltas is notable. The EPYC leads by roughly the same percentage in both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads, suggesting the advantage comes from a fundamental architectural efficiency rather than core count alone. The Xeon E-2276G's higher clock speeds, 3.80 GHz base and 4.90 GHz boost versus the EPYC's 2.10 GHz and 2.90 GHz, do not translate into benchmark wins. The EPYC's Zen architecture appears to extract more instructions per clock in these specific tests.

Looking beyond the head-to-head, the average benchmark scores tell a similar story. The EPYC 7251 posts an average score of 3671, placing it in the 56th percentile of all CPUs. The Xeon E-2276G averages 3614, sitting at the 55th percentile. The nearest rivals for the EPYC include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700X at 3673 (a -0.1% delta) and the Intel Core i3-13100E at 3668 (a +0.1% delta), showing the EPYC sits in a tightly contested performance band. The Xeon's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 1700 at 3613 (0% delta) and the Intel Xeon E-2286G at 3610 (+0.1% delta), indicating a similarly dense competitive cluster.

The Xeon does hold one benchmark advantage not captured in the head-to-head table: it has Geekbench results (multicore 6551, singlecore 1610) that the EPYC lacks entirely. While this does not change the head-to-head win tally (6 wins for AMD, 0 for Intel), it does mean the Xeon has a broader benchmark profile. The data shows the EPYC's wins are decisive but narrow in percentage terms; the Xeon is not being blown out, just consistently edged out.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the AMD EPYC 7251 is the superior processor for Cinebench workloads. It wins every single test in the head-to-head comparison, with a minimum margin of 6.1% and a maximum of 6.5%. If your priority is raw rendering performance in these CPU benchmarks, the EPYC is the clear choice. Its 8 cores and 16 threads outpace the Xeon's 6 cores and 12 threads in every scenario the data covers.

The Intel Xeon E-2276G, however, has its own arguments. It offers a much higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz compared to the EPYC's 2.90 GHz, which could benefit workloads not represented in the Cinebench suite. Its 80 W TDP is significantly lower than the EPYC's 120 W, making it more power-efficient on paper. It also includes integrated HD Graphics P630, which the EPYC lacks entirely, useful for systems needing display output without a discrete GPU. The Xeon is marked as end-of-life, while the EPYC remains active in production status.

For workloads purely measured by Cinebench scores, the EPYC 7251 wins. For users needing integrated graphics, lower power consumption, or a processor from a more recent release date (2019 versus 2017), the Xeon E-2276G offers qualitative advantages that the benchmark numbers do not capture. The data cannot declare an absolute winner; it can only show that AMD wins the tests performed, while Intel wins on features and efficiency metrics.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design lineages. The AMD EPYC 7251 uses the Zen architecture under the codename Naples, part of the EPYC 7001 series. It is built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with a die size of 213 mm² and 4,800 million transistors. The Xeon E-2276G uses the Coffee Lake architecture, specifically Coffee Lake-S WS, part of the Xeon E-2200 series. Intel also uses a 14 nm process but at its own foundry, with a smaller die size of 154 mm² and no transistor count listed in the data.

The cache configurations differ substantially. The EPYC allocates 96 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with a shared 32 MB L3 cache. The Xeon provides 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, with a shared 12 MB L3. This means the EPYC has more than double the L3 cache (32 MB versus 12 MB) and larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations. For workloads with high cache reuse, this could be a significant factor.

Memory architecture also diverges sharply. The EPYC supports eight-channel DDR4 memory with a theoretical bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. The Xeon supports dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth. This is a 3.6x difference in memory bandwidth, which the EPYC's server-oriented design leverages for memory-intensive applications. Both support ECC memory, but the EPYC's eight-channel setup offers far greater throughput. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3, while the Xeon uses Intel Socket 1151. Both use PCIe Gen 3, though the Xeon specifies 16 lanes from the CPU, while the EPYC does not list a lane count.

The EPYC has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the Xeon is locked. The EPYC's market segment is Server/Workstation, matching the Xeon's designation, but the EPYC's Naples codename and SP3 socket signal a dual-socket-capable platform, whereas the Xeon's 1151 socket is typically single-socket. The Xeon includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics P630); the EPYC has none. The EPYC's release date is June 2017; the Xeon's is May 2019.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification field. Core and thread counts: the EPYC has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Xeon has 6 cores and 12 threads. Clock speeds are dramatically different: the EPYC runs at 2.10 GHz base and 2.90 GHz boost, while the Xeon runs at 3.80 GHz base and 4.90 GHz boost, the Xeon is roughly 80% faster in base clock and 69% faster in boost clock. Despite this, the EPYC wins all Cinebench tests.

Thermal design power differs: the EPYC is rated at 120 W, the Xeon at 80 W. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3, the Xeon uses Intel Socket 1151. L1 cache per core is 96 KB for the EPYC versus 64 KB for the Xeon. L2 cache per core is 512 KB versus 256 KB. L3 cache is 32 MB shared versus 12 MB shared. Memory bus width is eight-channel versus dual-channel. Memory bandwidth is 153.6 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s. The foundry differs: GlobalFoundries for AMD, Intel for Intel. Die size is 213 mm² versus 154 mm². Transistors are 4,800 million versus not listed.

The Xeon has integrated HD Graphics P630 and a launch MSRP of $362; the EPYC has no integrated graphics and no launch MSRP listed. The EPYC has an unlocked multiplier; the Xeon is locked. Production status differs: the EPYC is active, the Xeon is end-of-life. Release dates are June 2017 for the EPYC and May 2019 for the Xeon. The part numbers also differ: the EPYC lists PS7251BFV8SAFPS7251BFAFWOF, while the Xeon lists SR3WS.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The AMD EPYC 7251 scores 12694 compared to the Intel Xeon E-2276G's 11957, a 6.2% advantage for the AMD part.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon E-2276G have any benchmark wins over the AMD EPYC 7251?

A: No. In the head-to-head comparison, the EPYC wins all six tests. The Xeon does have Geekbench scores (multicore 6551, singlecore 1610) that the EPYC does not have, but no direct head-to-head wins.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The EPYC supports eight-channel DDR4 with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Xeon supports dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s. This gives the EPYC a 3.6x bandwidth advantage.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Xeon E-2276G includes integrated graphics, specifically HD Graphics P630. The AMD EPYC 7251 has no integrated graphics.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The AMD EPYC 7251 is rated at 120 W, while the Intel Xeon E-2276G is rated at 80 W.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon E-2276G has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, compared to the AMD EPYC 7251's 2.90 GHz.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7251 wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. Its 8-core, 16-thread configuration with 32 MB of L3 cache and eight-channel memory makes it the stronger choice for multi-threaded rendering workloads as measured by Cinebench. The 6.1%–6.5% margins across R15, R20, and R23 indicate consistent superiority regardless of benchmark version. Its active production status and unlocked multiplier also suggest better long-term availability and overclocking flexibility. For server workloads demanding high memory bandwidth (153.6 GB/s) and large cache, the EPYC's architecture is clearly more capable in the tested scenarios.

The Intel Xeon E-2276G wins on qualitative factors not measured in the benchmarks. Its 4.90 GHz boost clock is substantially higher, which could benefit lightly-threaded applications that respond to raw clock speed. Its 80 W TDP is 33% lower than the EPYC's 120 W, making it more suitable for power-constrained environments. The integrated HD Graphics P630 provides display output without a discrete GPU, a feature the EPYC cannot offer. Its dual-channel memory (42.7 GB/s) is sufficient for many workloads, and its smaller die size (154 mm² versus 213 mm²) may indicate lower manufacturing complexity. The Xeon also has a launch MSRP of $362, which is listed in the data, though its end-of-life status may limit availability.

The data-driven conclusion is clear: for Cinebench-style performance, choose the EPYC 7251. For integrated graphics, lower power draw, and higher clock speeds, choose the Xeon E-2276G. The benchmarks show AMD winning outright, but the Xeon's feature set addresses different priorities that the numbers alone cannot resolve.