AMD EPYC 7262 vs Intel Xeon W-2150B Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results place the AMD EPYC 7262 ahead of the Intel Xeon W-2150B in every recorded Cinebench test. The margins are consistent and narrow, with the EPYC 7262 winning all six head-to-head comparisons. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7262 scores 1780 against the Xeon W-2150B’s 1750, a 1.7% advantage. The single-core R15 result is similar: 251 versus 246, a 2% lead for the AMD processor. These are not dramatic differences, but they are uniform across every workload tested.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the EPYC 7262 again leads by 1.7% in both multi-core and single-core tests. The multi-core scores are 7418 and 7294, while single-core scores are 1047 and 1029. The pattern repeats in Cinebench R23, where the EPYC 7262 records 17662 multi-core and 2493 single-core, against the Xeon W-2150B’s 17368 and 2452. The delta remains 1.7% in both cases. The consistency of this margin across three generations of Cinebench suggests a stable performance relationship rather than a workload-specific anomaly.

The Xeon W-2150B does have an additional Geekbench result in the database, with scores of 8481 multi-core and 1314 single-core. However, the EPYC 7262 has no recorded Geekbench score, so a direct comparison cannot be made in that test. The database shows the EPYC 7262 with six wins and the Xeon W-2150B with zero wins in head-to-head matchups, which accurately reflects the Cinebench data available.

When looking at the broader average benchmark score, the EPYC 7262 sits at 5109, while the Xeon W-2150B averages 4992. This places the AMD part slightly higher in the overall ranking, with a 60th percentile versus the Intel part’s 59th percentile across all CPUs. The nearest rivals for the EPYC 7262 include the Intel Core i9-7900X at 5120 (a 0.2% gap), the Intel Core i7-11850HE at 5095 (0.3% above the EPYC), and the Intel Xeon W-2155 at 5072 (0.7% below). For the Xeon W-2150B, the closest competitors are the Intel Core i3-12300HE at 4995 (0.1% below), the Intel Core i7-1375PRE at 4985 (0.1% below the Xeon), and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5650G at 5002 (0.2% above). These rival comparisons show both processors operating in a similar performance band, with the EPYC 7262 holding a slight edge in aggregate.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 7262 wins every Cinebench test recorded in the database, so its advantage is straightforward: it is faster in both multi-threaded and single-threaded rendering workloads. The margin is small, but it is universal. For users who rely on Cinebench as a proxy for CPU compute performance, the AMD part is the better choice in every measured scenario.

The Xeon W-2150B has no head-to-head wins in this dataset. However, it does have a Geekbench result that the EPYC 7262 lacks. The Geekbench multi-core score of 8481 and single-core score of 1314 provide an additional data point for Intel, but without a corresponding AMD score, it cannot be used to claim superiority. The database does not record a Geekbench run for the EPYC 7262, so any comparison there is impossible.

For workloads outside Cinebench, the recorded data offers limited guidance. The Xeon W-2150B’s higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz compared to the EPYC 7262’s 3.40 GHz suggests potential advantages in lightly threaded, frequency-sensitive tasks, but the Cinebench single-core results do not reflect that advantage. Instead, the EPYC 7262 leads in single-core Cinebench by 1.7% to 2%, indicating that the architectural efficiency of Zen 2 compensates for the lower peak frequency. The Xeon W-2150B has more cores (10 versus 8) and threads (20 versus 16), yet it still trails in multi-core Cinebench, which points to the EPYC 7262’s stronger per-core throughput.

In practical terms, the EPYC 7262 is the pick for multi-threaded rendering, compilation, or simulation workloads. The Xeon W-2150B, while not winning any recorded test, offers a larger core count and higher boost clock, which could matter in specific scenarios not captured by the benchmark suite. But strictly from the data, the EPYC 7262 wins across the board.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. The AMD EPYC 7262 is built on the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Rome, using a 7 nm process from TSMC. It packs 15,200 million transistors across a die size of 4x 74 mm². The Intel Xeon W-2150B uses the Skylake architecture, codenamed Skylake-W, on Intel’s 14 nm process, with a die size of 484 mm². The process node difference is significant: 7 nm versus 14 nm, which helps explain the EPYC 7262’s efficiency and per-core performance despite lower clock speeds.

The cache hierarchies diverge substantially. The EPYC 7262 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of L3 per die, for a total L3 of 128 MB. The Xeon W-2150B has the same 64 KB L1 per core but a larger 1 MB L2 per core, and a shared 13.75 MB L3. The EPYC 7262’s total L3 cache is far larger, which benefits workloads with large working sets. However, the Xeon W-2150B’s larger L2 per core (1 MB versus 512 KB) may help with certain access patterns.

Memory support also differs. Both support DDR4 and ECC memory, but the EPYC 7262 uses an eight-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. The Xeon W-2150B uses a quad-channel bus with 85.3 GB/s. The AMD part offers more than double the memory bandwidth, which is critical for server and workstation workloads that stream large datasets. PCIe capabilities follow a similar pattern: the EPYC 7262 provides Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only), while the Xeon W-2150B provides Gen 3 with 48 lanes (CPU only). The EPYC 7262’s newer PCIe standard and higher lane count give it a clear expansion and I/O advantage.

The socket and platform differ as well. The EPYC 7262 uses AMD Socket SP3, while the Xeon W-2150B uses Intel Socket 2066. The AMD part is from the EPYC 7002 series, released in August 2019, and remains active in production. The Intel part was released in December 2017 and is now end-of-life. Neither processor has integrated graphics, and both have locked multipliers. The EPYC 7262 has a TDP of 155 W, while the Xeon W-2150B has a TDP of 120 W, meaning the Intel part uses less power on paper, though the EPYC 7262’s performance lead comes despite the higher TDP.

The Verdict

Based solely on the recorded benchmarks, the AMD EPYC 7262 is the faster processor. It wins all six Cinebench tests, with margins between 1.7% and 2%. Its average benchmark score of 5109 exceeds the Xeon W-2150B’s 4992, and its 60th percentile ranking is one point higher than the Intel part’s 59th. The EPYC 7262 achieves this with fewer cores and threads, which speaks to the efficiency of the Zen 2 architecture. It also offers substantially more L3 cache, memory bandwidth, and PCIe lanes, making it the more capable platform for memory-intensive and I/O-heavy workloads.

The Intel Xeon W-2150B is not without merit. It has more cores (10 versus 8) and threads (20 versus 16), a higher boost clock (4.50 GHz versus 3.40 GHz), and a lower TDP (120 W versus 155 W). Its larger L2 cache per core could benefit certain workloads. However, in the tests recorded, these advantages do not translate into wins. The Xeon W-2150B also has a Geekbench result in the database, but the EPYC 7262 lacks a comparable score, so no conclusion can be drawn from that test.

For users choosing between these two, the data points to the EPYC 7262 for any workload covered by Cinebench, which includes rendering and general multi-threaded compute. The Xeon W-2150B might be considered for environments where its specific characteristics, such as higher boost frequency or lower power draw, are prioritized, but the recorded benchmarks do not support a performance advantage. The EPYC 7262 is the safer choice based on the evidence.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core Cinebench tests?

A: The AMD EPYC 7262 wins in all three multi-core Cinebench versions. It scores 1780 in R15, 7418 in R20, and 17662 in R23, versus the Xeon W-2150B’s 1750, 7294, and 17368. The margin is 1.7% in each case.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon W-2150B win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The database records six head-to-head benchmark wins for the AMD EPYC 7262 and zero for the Intel Xeon W-2150B. All Cinebench single-core and multi-core tests favor the AMD part.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare between these two CPUs?

A: The AMD EPYC 7262 supports eight-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. The Intel Xeon W-2150B supports quad-channel DDR4 with a bandwidth of 85.3 GB/s. The AMD part offers more than double the memory bandwidth.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD EPYC 7262 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Xeon W-2150B has 10 cores and 20 threads. Despite fewer cores, the EPYC 7262 leads in all recorded Cinebench tests.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD EPYC 7262 has 32 MB of L3 per die, totaling 128 MB. The Intel Xeon W-2150B has 13.75 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC 7262’s total L3 is nearly ten times larger.

Q: What is the production status of each CPU?

A: The AMD EPYC 7262 is listed as Active in production. The Intel Xeon W-2150B is listed as End-of-life. The EPYC 7262 was released in August 2019, while the Xeon W-2150B was released in December 2017.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 7262 | Intel Xeon W-2150B |

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

| Cores | 8 | 10 |

| Threads | 16 | 20 |

| Base Clock | 3.20 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.40 GHz | 4.50 GHz |

| TDP | 155 W | 120 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | Intel Socket 2066 |

| Architecture | Zen 2 | Skylake |

| Codename | Rome | Skylake-W |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 15,200 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 4x 74 mm² | 484 mm² |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 32 MB (per die), 128 MB total | 13.75 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Eight-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | 85.3 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 128 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3, 48 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Release Date | 2019-08-06 | 2017-12-20 |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Launch MSRP | $575 | Not listed |

| Part Number | 100-000000041 | SR3LS |

| Average Benchmark Score | 5109 | 4992 |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 60 | 59 |