CPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a striking, if narrow, sweep for the AMD EPYC 7262. Across all six Cinebench tests, R15, R20, and R23, each in both single-core and multi-core configurations, the EPYC 7262 takes the win. The margins are consistent and remarkably tight, ranging from a 0.7% to 0.8% advantage. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 7262 scores 17,662 against the Xeon W-2155’s 17,538, a 0.7% gap. The single-core R23 result mirrors this pattern: 2,493 versus 2,475, again a 0.7% lead for AMD.

The story is similar in the older R20 suite. The EPYC 7262 posts 7,418 in multi-core, edging out the Xeon’s 7,365 by 0.7%. Its single-core R20 score of 1,047 beats the Intel part’s 1,039 by 0.8%. Even in the legacy R15 test, which often favors different architectural strengths, the AMD chip holds its advantage: 1,780 versus 1,767 in multi-core (0.7%) and 251 versus 249 in single-core (0.8%).

While the deltaPct values are small, none exceeding 0.8%, they are uniform in direction. This is not a case of one chip winning on bandwidth-heavy workloads while losing on latency-sensitive ones. The EPYC 7262 simply outperforms the Xeon W-2155 across the board, albeit by a razor-thin margin. When placed in the broader context of the nearest rivals list, both processors sit near the same performance tier. The EPYC 7262’s average benchmark score is 5,109, and it sits 0.7% above the Xeon W-2155’s 5,072. That 5,072 average places the Xeon just 0.4% behind the Intel Core i9-12900TE and 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core i9-9820X, indicating these two chips are effectively peers in overall performance.

The average benchmark score for the EPYC 7262 (5,109) also puts it 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i7-11850HE, while the Xeon W-2155’s 5,072 average is 0.4% behind that same rival. In percentile terms, both chips land at the 60th percentile among all CPUs, reinforcing the notion that they occupy the same competitive space. The EPYC 7262’s win count of 6 out of 6 head-to-head tests is decisive in a procedural sense, but the performance delta is so small that it suggests a near-tie in real-world application performance, likely within run-to-run variance.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two processors is substantial, even if the benchmark results are not. The AMD EPYC 7262 is built on the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Rome, and fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 15,200 million transistors across a complex of four dies, each measuring 74 mm². In contrast, the Intel Xeon W-2155 uses the Skylake architecture, specifically Skylake-W, on a 14 nm process from Intel’s own fabs. Its die is a monolithic 484 mm². The process node difference is a full generation apart, with TSMC’s 7 nm offering a denser, more power-efficient transistor layout than Intel’s 14 nm.

Core and thread counts also diverge. The EPYC 7262 provides 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Xeon W-2155 offers 10 cores and 20 threads. This gives Intel a 25% advantage in raw core count. Yet the AMD chip still manages to match or slightly exceed the Xeon’s performance, a testament to the Zen 2 architecture’s efficiency. The cache hierarchies are distinctly different as well. The EPYC 7262 features 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 cache per core, but its L3 cache is organized per die at 32 MB, with a total of 128 MB across the four-die package. The Xeon W-2155 also has 64 KB of L1 per core, but a larger 1 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 13.75 MB of L3 cache. The EPYC’s 128 MB total L3 dwarfs Intel’s 13.75 MB, a factor of over 9x more cache capacity.

Memory support further differentiates the pair. Both support DDR4 and ECC memory, but the EPYC 7262 uses an eight-channel memory bus with a peak bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. The Xeon W-2155 is limited to a quad-channel bus and 85.3 GB/s. That is a 2.4x bandwidth advantage for the EPYC. PCIe connectivity also favors AMD: the EPYC 7262 provides 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, while the Xeon W-2155 offers 48 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. The EPYC’s lanes are double the speed (Gen 4 vs Gen 3) and nearly triple the count.

The sockets and platforms are incompatible. The EPYC 7262 uses AMD Socket SP3, while the Xeon W-2155 uses Intel Socket 2066. Clock speeds show a different trade-off: the Xeon has a higher base clock of 3.30 GHz versus 3.20 GHz, and a significantly higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz versus 3.40 GHz. Despite the higher clocks, the Xeon’s 140 W TDP is lower than the EPYC’s 155 W TDP. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier, and both lack integrated graphics.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon W-2155 has a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, substantially higher than the AMD EPYC 7262’s 3.40 GHz.

Q: How do the two chips compare in terms of PCIe support?

A: The AMD EPYC 7262 offers 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, while the Intel Xeon W-2155 provides 48 PCIe Gen 3 lanes.

Q: What is the L3 cache difference between the two?

A: The EPYC 7262 has 32 MB of L3 cache per die, totaling 128 MB, whereas the Xeon W-2155 has a shared 13.75 MB of L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon W-2155 has 10 cores and 20 threads, while the AMD EPYC 7262 has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Is there a significant performance gap in the benchmarks?

A: No, the AMD EPYC 7262 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, but the largest margin is just 0.8%, indicating a near-tie in performance.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No, the AMD EPYC 7262 is listed as Active, while the Intel Xeon W-2155 is listed as End-of-life.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear, if narrow, verdict in favor of the AMD EPYC 7262. It wins every single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, from Cinebench R15 single-core to R23 multi-core. The margins are consistent, always between 0.7% and 0.8%, but they are universally positive for AMD. For a workload that relies heavily on Cinebench-style rendering, the EPYC 7262 is the marginally faster chip.

However, the choice between these two is not solely about raw benchmark scores. The EPYC 7262 offers a dramatically better memory subsystem, with 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth versus 85.3 GB/s, and far more PCIe lanes (128 Gen 4 vs 48 Gen 3). It also packs 128 MB of L3 cache compared to 13.75 MB. These features make the EPYC 7262 the more capable platform for memory-bandwidth-intensive server workloads or systems requiring extensive I/O expansion. The Xeon W-2155, with its higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz and lower 140 W TDP, may have an edge in lightly threaded tasks that rely on a single core’s maximum speed, but the benchmark data does not support that, the EPYC wins single-core tests too.

The Xeon W-2155 does offer more cores (10 vs 8) and threads (20 vs 16), which could be a tiebreaker for heavily parallel workloads that scale perfectly with core count. Yet, in the Cinebench multi-core tests, the EPYC 7262 still comes out ahead, suggesting the Zen 2 architecture’s efficiency overcomes the core deficit. Given the EPYC’s newer 7 nm process, larger cache, faster memory bus, and active production status, the data favors it for most users. The Xeon W-2155, being end-of-life and on an older 14 nm node, is a less future-proof investment. Pick the EPYC 7262 if you want the best benchmark results and platform longevity; pick the Xeon W-2155 only if you need its specific socket or core count advantages, though the data shows no performance benefit from those features.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 7262 | Intel Xeon W-2155 |

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

| Cores | 8 | 10 |

| Threads | 16 | 20 |

| Base Clock | 3.20 GHz | 3.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.40 GHz | 4.50 GHz |

| TDP | 155 W | 140 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 |

| Die Size | 4x 74 mm² | 484 mm² |

| Transistors | 15,200 million | N/A |

| 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 | Gen 3, 48 Lanes |

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

| Release Date | 2019-08-06 | 2017-08-28 |

| Launch MSRP | $575 | $1440 |