AMD EPYC 7252 vs Intel Xeon Gold 5315Y Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in raw multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 5315Y wins every recorded multi-core benchmark. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 17027 against the AMD EPYC 7252's 16499, a 3.2% advantage. The same 3.2% delta appears in Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core tests.

Q: Is the AMD EPYC 7252 competitive in single-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel part also leads in single-core tests. The Xeon Gold 5315Y scores 2403 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 2329 for the EPYC, a 3.2% gap. The largest single-core margin is in Cinebench R15, where Intel leads 242 to 234, a 3.4% difference.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon Gold 5315Y and the AMD EPYC 7252 support ECC memory. Both also use DDR4 memory with an eight-channel memory bus.

Q: How do their memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 5315Y has a significantly higher recorded memory bandwidth of 187.7 GB/s. The AMD EPYC 7252 records 85.3 GB/s. This is a major difference despite both using eight-channel DDR4.

Q: What are the PCIe lane counts for each platform?

A: The AMD EPYC 7252 offers 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only). The Intel Xeon Gold 5315Y provides 64 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only). The AMD part has double the lane count.

Q: Which processor has a higher base clock speed?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 5315Y has a base clock of 3.20 GHz, while the AMD EPYC 7252 has a base clock of 3.10 GHz. The Intel part also boosts higher at 3.60 GHz compared to 3.20 GHz for the AMD chip.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data shows a clean sweep for the Intel Xeon Gold 5315Y across all six head-to-head tests. The Intel processor wins every Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 run, both single-core and multi-core. The margins are consistent, sitting at 3.2% for most tests and 3.4% for Cinebench R15 single-core.

The AMD EPYC 7252 does not win a single benchmark in the comparison. However, its strengths lie outside the Cinebench suite. The EPYC 7252 offers double the PCIe lanes (128 versus 64), which matters for systems with many GPUs or NVMe drives. It also has a lower TDP of 120 watts against Intel's 140 watts, which can simplify cooling in dense server chassis.

For workloads that rely heavily on Cinebench-style rendering, the Intel Xeon Gold 5315Y is the clear choice. For I/O-heavy server builds that need maximum PCIe expansion, the AMD EPYC 7252's lane count gives it a structural advantage that no CPU benchmark can capture.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Xeon Gold 5315Y uses the Ice Lake-SP architecture built on Intel's 10 nm process. It is a monolithic design with 8 cores and 16 threads. Each core has 64 KB of L1 cache and 1 MB of L2 cache. The L3 cache is 12 MB shared across all cores.

The AMD EPYC 7252 uses the Zen 2 architecture on TSMC's 7 nm process. It is a chiplet design, with the recorded die size showing 2x 74 mm². The transistor count is listed at 7,600 million. Each core has 64 KB of L1 cache and 512 KB of L2 cache. The L3 cache is organized as 32 MB per die, totaling 64 MB.

The cache hierarchy differs substantially. Intel gives each core more L2 cache (1 MB versus 512 KB), while AMD provides over five times the total L3 cache (64 MB versus 12 MB). This matters for workloads with large working sets that fit in L3.

The process node difference is notable: 10 nm for Intel versus 7 nm for AMD. The AMD chip also uses a different foundry, TSMC, while Intel fabricates its own silicon.

Specification Differences

The two processors share several core specifications: both have 8 cores, 16 threads, support DDR4 memory, use an eight-channel memory bus, support ECC memory, and have no integrated graphics. Both are active production parts for the server and workstation market.

The differences are clear in the numbers:

• Base clock: Intel 3.20 GHz, AMD 3.10 GHz
• Boost clock: Intel 3.60 GHz, AMD 3.20 GHz
• TDP: Intel 140 W, AMD 120 W
• Process node: Intel 10 nm, AMD 7 nm
• L2 cache: Intel 1 MB per core, AMD 512 KB per core
• L3 cache: Intel 12 MB shared, AMD 64 MB total (32 MB per die)
• Memory bandwidth: Intel 187.7 GB/s, AMD 85.3 GB/s
• PCIe lanes: Intel 64 Gen 4 lanes, AMD 128 Gen 4 lanes
• Socket: Intel Socket 4189, AMD Socket SP3
• Release date: Intel April 2021, AMD August 2019

The AMD EPYC 7252 has a launch MSRP of $475. The Intel Xeon Gold 5315Y has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are uniform. The Intel Xeon Gold 5315Y wins all six recorded comparisons, and the margins are tightly clustered.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, Intel scores 1716 against AMD's 1662, a 3.2% lead. The single-core run shows Intel at 242 and AMD at 234, a 3.4% margin, the largest relative gap in the entire comparison.

Cinebench R20 repeats the pattern. Multi-core: Intel 7151, AMD 6929, a 3.2% delta. Single-core: Intel 1009, AMD 978, also 3.2%.

Cinebench R23 follows the same script. Multi-core: Intel 17027, AMD 16499, a 3.2% delta. Single-core: Intel 2403, AMD 2329, a 3.2% delta.

The consistency of these results suggests the Intel part holds a steady performance advantage across different Cinebench versions and workload types. The 3.2% figure appears repeatedly, indicating a stable architectural edge rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The average benchmark score in the database reflects this. The Intel Xeon Gold 5315Y has an average score of 4887, while the AMD EPYC 7252 sits at 4772. Both processors land in the 59th percentile of all CPUs in the database.

The nearest rivals for the Intel part include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G at 4879 (0.2% behind) and the Intel Xeon W-1290 at 4932 (0.9% ahead). For the AMD EPYC 7252, the closest competitors are the Intel Xeon W-1290E at 4775 (0.1% ahead) and the Intel Core i5-1350P at 4776 (0.1% ahead). These figures show both chips sit in a crowded performance band, but the Intel part has a measurable edge over the AMD chip in this direct comparison.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion. The Intel Xeon Gold 5315Y outperforms the AMD EPYC 7252 in every recorded CPU benchmark. The margins are consistent at around 3.2%, and the Intel part also delivers substantially higher memory bandwidth at 187.7 GB/s versus 85.3 GB/s.

Choose the Intel Xeon Gold 5315Y if your priority is raw compute performance in Cinebench-style workloads. It wins every test, offers higher clock speeds, and provides more L2 cache per core. The higher memory bandwidth is a meaningful advantage for memory-sensitive server applications.

Choose the AMD EPYC 7252 if your priority is platform expansion and power efficiency. It offers 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, double the Intel part's 64 lanes. This makes it the better fit for systems packed with GPUs, storage controllers, or high-speed network cards. The 120 watt TDP is also lower than Intel's 140 watts, which can reduce cooling requirements in dense deployments.

The AMD chip also has a much larger L3 cache at 64 MB total versus 12 MB. Workloads that repeatedly access a large dataset may benefit from this cache capacity, even if the raw Cinebench scores favor Intel.

For a general-purpose server CPU where compute performance is the main metric, the Intel Xeon Gold 5315Y is the stronger pick. For an I/O-centric platform where PCIe expansion and power draw matter more than a few percentage points of rendering performance, the AMD EPYC 7252 has clear structural advantages. The benchmark data shows Intel winning the compute battle, but the specification sheet shows AMD winning the platform flexibility battle.