AMD EPYC 7252 vs Intel Xeon W-2150B Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a remarkably consistent picture across every Cinebench workload: the Intel Xeon W-2150B wins all six head-to-head comparisons, and the margin is nearly identical in each test. The EPYC 7252 trails by 5 percent in five of the six benchmarks, with the single exception being Cinebench R15 single-core, where the deficit is 4.9 percent. This uniformity suggests the performance gap is structural, not workload-dependent.

Starting with multithreaded rendering, the Xeon W-2150B scores 1,750 in Cinebench R15 multicore versus 1,662 for the EPYC 7252, a 5 percent advantage. In Cinebench R20 multicore, the Intel part reaches 7,294 against 6,929, again a 5 percent gap. The R23 multicore test shows the same pattern: 17,368 for the Xeon W-2150B and 16,499 for the EPYC 7252. These are not marginal wins; the Intel processor is consistently ahead by a meaningful margin in sustained multi-threaded workloads.

Single-thread performance tells a similar story, though the numbers are closer in percentage terms. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Xeon W-2150B scores 246 versus 234 for the EPYC 7252 (4.9 percent ahead). R20 single-core shows 1,029 against 978 (5 percent ahead), and R23 single-core shows 2,452 versus 2,329 (5 percent ahead). The consistency of this 5 percent delta across three generations of Cinebench indicates a stable per-core advantage for the Intel design.

The broader benchmark database places both processors at the 59th percentile among all CPUs, meaning they sit at the same position in the overall performance distribution. However, the average benchmark score differs: the Xeon W-2150B averages 4,992, while the EPYC 7252 averages 4,772. That 220-point gap in the average aligns with the Cinebench results, reinforcing that the Intel part is the faster chip in this matchup.

Interestingly, the nearest rivals for each processor occupy similar performance tiers. The EPYC 7252 sits within 0.7 percent of the Intel Core i9-9900KS (which scores 4,738) and within 0.6 percent of the Intel Xeon E-2386G (4,799). The Xeon W-2150B, meanwhile, is within 0.2 percent of the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G and Intel Core i5-13500TE, both scoring 5,002. This places both CPUs in the same general performance class despite the Intel part holding a consistent edge in direct comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Xeon W-2150B wins every multi-threaded Cinebench test. It scores 1,750 in R15 multicore, 7,294 in R20 multicore, and 17,368 in R23 multicore, versus 1,662, 6,929, and 16,499 for the AMD EPYC 7252 respectively. The Intel part is 5 percent ahead in each case.

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

A: No, it trails in all three single-core tests. The Xeon W-2150B scores 246 in R15 single-core, 1,029 in R20 single-core, and 2,452 in R23 single-core, while the EPYC 7252 scores 234, 978, and 2,329 respectively. The Intel advantage is consistently 4.9 to 5 percent.

Q: How do these processors compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The EPYC 7252 has an average benchmark score of 4,772, with its closest rival being the Intel Xeon W-1290E at 4,775 (0.1 percent faster). The Xeon W-2150B averages 4,992, with the Intel Core i3-12300HE at 4,995 as its nearest competitor (0.1 percent faster). Both sit at the 59th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD EPYC 7252 and the Intel Xeon W-2150B support ECC memory, making them suitable for workstations and servers where data integrity is critical.

Q: What is the production status of each processor?

A: The AMD EPYC 7252 is listed as Active, meaning it is still in production. The Intel Xeon W-2150B is listed as End-of-life, indicating it has been discontinued.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon W-2150B has a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, while the AMD EPYC 7252 has a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. The Intel part also has a higher base clock at 3.00 GHz versus 3.10 GHz for the AMD chip, though the EPYC has the higher base clock of the two.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon W-2150B is the faster processor in every benchmark recorded. If raw performance is the sole criterion, the choice is Intel. The Xeon W-2150B delivers 5 percent better multi-threaded performance in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, and 4.9 to 5 percent better single-threaded performance across the same tests. Its average benchmark score of 4,992 exceeds the EPYC 7252's 4,772 by roughly 4.6 percent.

However, the EPYC 7252 is not without merit. Its production status is Active, meaning it is still available for new systems, while the Xeon W-2150B is End-of-life. For a builder sourcing new hardware in volume, the AMD part offers a current product with ongoing availability. The EPYC 7252 also brings platform advantages that are not reflected in Cinebench scores, such as PCIe Gen 4 support with 128 lanes and eight-channel memory, versus PCIe Gen 3 with 48 lanes and quad-channel memory on the Intel side.

The choice depends on priorities. For a system where benchmark performance is the dominant requirement and the platform is already chosen, the Xeon W-2150B is the clear winner based on recorded data. For a forward-looking deployment where platform capabilities matter more than the 5 percent Cinebench deficit, the EPYC 7252 remains a viable option. Both processors occupy the same 59th percentile in the database, so neither is a class-leading part; the Intel chip simply holds a consistent edge in this head-to-head.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in core configuration, clock speeds, memory channels, PCIe support, and platform generation. The AMD EPYC 7252 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Xeon W-2150B has 10 cores and 20 threads, giving the Intel part 25 percent more cores and threads. The base clocks are close: 3.10 GHz for the EPYC 7252 versus 3.00 GHz for the Xeon W-2150B. The boost clocks diverge sharply: 3.20 GHz for the AMD part versus 4.50 GHz for the Intel part, a 40 percent difference.

Memory support differs in channel count but not in bandwidth. The EPYC 7252 uses eight-channel DDR4 with a memory bandwidth of 85.3 GB/s, while the Xeon W-2150B uses quad-channel DDR4 with the same 85.3 GB/s bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. PCIe capabilities are another major split: the EPYC 7252 provides Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only), while the Xeon W-2150B provides Gen 3 with 48 lanes (CPU only). The sockets are different as well: AMD Socket SP3 for the EPYC 7252 and Intel Socket 2066 for the Xeon W-2150B.

The TDP is identical at 120 watts for both processors, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The launch MSRP for the EPYC 7252 is $475; no launch MSRP is recorded for the Xeon W-2150B. The release dates differ by roughly 20 months: the EPYC 7252 launched on 2019-08-06, while the Xeon W-2150B launched on 2017-12-20.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two CPUs is substantial. The AMD EPYC 7252 uses the Zen 2 architecture (codename Rome) built on a 7 nm process at TSMC, with 7,600 million transistors spread across a 2x 74 mm² die design. The Intel Xeon W-2150B uses the Skylake architecture (codename Skylake-W) built on Intel's 14 nm process, with a die size of 484 mm². No transistor count is recorded for the Intel part.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. Both share 64 KB of L1 cache per core, but the L2 cache is 512 KB per core on the AMD chip versus 1 MB per core on the Intel chip. L3 cache is organized differently: the EPYC 7252 has 32 MB per die with a total of 64 MB, while the Xeon W-2150B has 13.75 MB shared across the entire chip. This gives the AMD processor more than four times the total L3 cache, which can benefit certain data-heavy workloads.

The generation labels reflect the design split. The EPYC 7252 is part of the EPYC 7002 series (Zen 2 Rome), while the Xeon W-2150B is part of the Xeon W Skylake-W family. The process node difference is notable: 7 nm versus 14 nm, a full generation apart in manufacturing technology. The foundry also differs, with TSMC producing the AMD chip and Intel producing its own.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon W-2150B wins every benchmark in the recorded head-to-head data. In multi-threaded workloads, it is 5 percent ahead of the EPYC 7252 across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. In single-threaded workloads, it maintains a 4.9 to 5 percent advantage. For users running Cinebench-style rendering tasks, whether single-frame or multi-frame, the Intel part is the better performer. Its higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz versus 3.20 GHz explains the single-thread wins, while its additional two cores and four threads explain the multi-thread wins.

The AMD EPYC 7252 does not win any benchmark in this comparison, but it offers platform strengths that fall outside the Cinebench metrics. Its PCIe Gen 4 support with 128 lanes is a four-generation leap over the Intel part's PCIe Gen 3 with 48 lanes, making it better suited for systems with many high-bandwidth expansion cards. Its eight-channel memory architecture provides the same theoretical bandwidth as the Intel quad-channel design (85.3 GB/s) but with more physical channels, which can reduce latency under certain access patterns. The larger L3 cache (64 MB total versus 13.75 MB) may also benefit workloads with large working sets that fit in cache.

For a workstation built around a single GPU and CPU rendering, the Xeon W-2150B is the data-backed choice. For a server or workstation with heavy I/O demands, many NVMe drives, or multiple accelerators, the EPYC 7252's platform features could outweigh its 5 percent Cinebench deficit. The production status also matters: the EPYC 7252 is Active, while the Xeon W-2150B is End-of-life, so new system builds may find the AMD part easier to source. The benchmark data favors Intel, but the platform data favors AMD for certain use cases.