AMD EPYC 72F3 vs Intel Xeon D-2796TE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD EPYC 72F3 sweeps the head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, winning all six recorded tests against the Intel Xeon D-2796TE. The margins are consistent, with the EPYC 72F3 leading by 2.9% in four of the six tests and by 2.8% in the remaining two. This uniformity across both single-core and multi-core workloads indicates a genuine performance edge rather than a workload-specific anomaly.

In Cinebench R15, the EPYC 72F3 scores 2334 in multi-core against 2268 for the Xeon D-2796TE, a 2.9% advantage. The single-core result follows the same pattern: 329 points versus 320, a 2.8% lead. Moving to Cinebench R20, the EPYC 72F3 delivers 9728 multi-core points while the Xeon D-2796TE manages 9452, again a 2.9% gap. Single-core R20 shows 1373 versus 1334, another 2.9% difference.

The largest absolute margin appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the EPYC 72F3 scores 23164 against 22507 for the Xeon D-2796TE. This 657-point difference is the biggest numerical gap in the dataset, though it still represents the same 2.9% relative advantage. The R23 single-core test shows 3270 versus 3177, a 93-point gap that is 2.9% in relative terms.

The EPYC 72F3's average benchmark score of 6700 places it slightly above the Xeon D-2796TE's 6510. Both processors sit at the 62nd percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they occupy a similar overall performance tier. However, the EPYC 72F3's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon Gold 5317 at 6710 (0.1% behind the EPYC) and the Intel Xeon D-2775TE at 6711 (0.2% behind). The Xeon D-2796TE's closest competitors include the Intel Xeon W-2191B at 6531 (0.3% behind) and the Intel Core i9-7960X at 6533 (0.3% behind).

What stands out is that the Xeon D-2796TE, despite having 20 cores and 40 threads compared to the EPYC 72F3's 8 cores and 16 threads, cannot overcome the EPYC's per-core efficiency in these multi-threaded benchmarks. The EPYC 72F3's 256 MB of shared L3 cache and higher clock speeds appear to compensate for its core deficit. The Xeon D-2796TE's 30 MB shared L3 cache is considerably smaller, and its base clock of 2.00 GHz is far below the EPYC's 3.70 GHz, with boost clocks of 3.10 GHz versus 4.10 GHz.

This is not a close contest. The EPYC 72F3 wins every recorded benchmark, and the consistency of the 2.9% margin suggests a stable architectural advantage rather than test-specific noise. The data shows no scenario where the Xeon D-2796TE pulls ahead, even in workloads that should theoretically favor higher core counts.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most benchmarks?

A: The AMD EPYC 72F3 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, with no wins recorded for the Intel Xeon D-2796TE.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The EPYC 72F3 leads by 2.9% in Cinebench R15 multi-core, R20 multi-core, R20 single-core, R23 multi-core, and R23 single-core. The smallest margin is 2.8% in Cinebench R15 single-core.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The EPYC 72F3 has an average benchmark score of 6700, while the Xeon D-2796TE scores 6510. Both sit at the 62nd percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Does the Xeon D-2796TE's higher core count help it win any test?

A: No. Despite having 20 cores and 40 threads versus the EPYC 72F3's 8 cores and 16 threads, the Xeon D-2796TE loses all multi-core tests by 2.9%.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each processor?

A: The EPYC 72F3's nearest rival is the Intel Xeon Gold 5317 at 6710 (0.1% behind), while the Xeon D-2796TE's nearest rival is the Intel Xeon W-2191B at 6531 (0.3% behind).

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The EPYC 72F3 boosts to 4.10 GHz, while the Xeon D-2796TE boosts to 3.10 GHz. The base clocks are 3.70 GHz and 2.00 GHz respectively.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 72F3 is the faster processor in every recorded benchmark. It wins all six Cinebench tests with margins between 2.8% and 2.9%, and its average benchmark score of 6700 exceeds the Xeon D-2796TE's 6510 by a meaningful margin.

The EPYC 72F3 is the choice for workloads where per-core performance matters, such as lightly threaded applications, database transactions, or any task that benefits from its higher 4.10 GHz boost clock and 256 MB L3 cache. Its 2.9% lead in single-core tests across all three Cinebench versions confirms this advantage is consistent.

The Xeon D-2796TE, despite its 20 cores and 40 threads, does not convert its core advantage into benchmark wins. Its lower clock speeds and smaller 30 MB L3 cache appear to limit its multi-threaded performance relative to the EPYC 72F3. However, its 118W TDP is significantly lower than the EPYC 72F3's 180W, which may appeal to deployments where power draw is a primary constraint, though the benchmark data does not capture power efficiency directly.

For raw performance, the EPYC 72F3 is the clear winner. The Xeon D-2796TE offers more cores but delivers less performance in every recorded test. The 62nd percentile ranking for both processors indicates they occupy similar overall tiers, but within that tier, the EPYC 72F3 is consistently ahead.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification field. The EPYC 72F3 uses 8 cores with 16 threads, while the Xeon D-2796TE offers 20 cores with 40 threads. Core count is the most striking difference, with the Intel part providing 12 additional cores and 24 additional threads.

Clock speeds diverge substantially. The EPYC 72F3 has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. The Xeon D-2796TE operates at a base clock of 2.00 GHz and boosts to 3.10 GHz. This represents a 1.70 GHz base clock difference and a 1.00 GHz boost clock difference in favor of the AMD part.

Thermal design power differs by 62W, with the EPYC 72F3 rated at 180W and the Xeon D-2796TE at 118W. The socket types are incompatible: AMD Socket SP3 for the EPYC 72F3 versus Intel BGA 2579 for the Xeon D-2796TE.

Memory architecture shows another major split. The EPYC 72F3 supports eight-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, while the Xeon D-2796TE uses quad-channel DDR4 at 93.9 GB/s. Both support ECC memory.

PCIe capabilities differ as well. The EPYC 72F3 provides Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only), while the Xeon D-2796TE offers Gen 4 with 32 lanes (CPU only). This 96-lane difference is substantial for systems with many expansion devices.

Cache configurations are markedly different. The EPYC 72F3 has 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 256 MB shared L3. The Xeon D-2796TE has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB shared L3. The EPYC's 256 MB L3 dwarfs the Intel part's 30 MB.

Release dates also differ: the EPYC 72F3 launched on March 14, 2021, while the Xeon D-2796TE launched on February 23, 2022. The launch MSRP for the EPYC 72F3 is $2468, and for the Xeon D-2796TE it is $2101.

Architecture Differences

The EPYC 72F3 is built on AMD's Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Milan, using a 7 nm process from TSMC. The Xeon D-2796TE uses Intel's Ice Lake architecture, codenamed Ice Lake-D, on a 10 nm process from Intel. This process node difference is significant: 7 nm versus 10 nm, with the smaller node typically enabling higher clock speeds and better power efficiency.

The EPYC 72F3's die consists of 8 chiplets, each measuring 81 mm², totaling 33,200 million transistors. The Xeon D-2796TE's die size and transistor count are not recorded in the database. This lack of data prevents a direct comparison of silicon complexity.

Core architecture differs fundamentally. The EPYC 72F3's Zen 3 cores are designed for high IPC and clock per core, which explains its 4.10 GHz boost despite having only 8 cores. The Xeon D-2796TE's Ice Lake cores are optimized for power efficiency in embedded and edge server applications, reflected in its 118W TDP and more modest 3.10 GHz boost.

Cache hierarchy reflects different design philosophies. The EPYC 72F3 pairs 512 KB L2 per core with a massive 256 MB shared L3, likely designed to serve large working sets across many virtual machines. The Xeon D-2796TE gives each core 1.25 MB L2, which is larger per core, but its 30 MB shared L3 is much smaller overall.

Memory controllers also differ architecturally. The EPYC 72F3's eight-channel controller delivers 204.8 GB/s, which is more than double the Xeon D-2796TE's quad-channel 93.9 GB/s. For memory-intensive workloads, this bandwidth advantage is critical.

PCIe lane allocation is another architectural differentiator. The EPYC 72F3 exposes 128 Gen 4 lanes directly from the CPU, while the Xeon D-2796TE provides only 32 Gen 4 lanes. This makes the EPYC suitable for high-density storage or accelerator configurations.

Both processors lack integrated graphics, and neither has an unlocked multiplier, confirming their server-focused positioning.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 72F3 wins every recorded benchmark, but its advantages are particularly pronounced in specific use cases. The 2.9% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core (23164 versus 22507) suggests strong performance in rendering and content creation workloads. The 2.9% single-core advantage (3270 versus 3177 in R23) indicates superiority in transactional workloads, web serving, and any application that depends on single-threaded latency.

The EPYC 72F3's eight-channel memory at 204.8 GB/s gives it a clear edge for in-memory databases, large-scale analytics, and virtualized environments where memory bandwidth is the bottleneck. Its 256 MB L3 cache likely benefits workloads with large shared data sets, such as financial risk modeling or scientific simulations. The 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes make it suitable for systems with many NVMe drives or multiple GPUs.

The Intel Xeon D-2796TE, despite losing all benchmarks, may still be preferable in specific scenarios. Its 118W TDP is substantially lower than the EPYC 72F3's 180W, which matters for dense server deployments or edge computing where cooling and power budgets are tight. The BGA 2579 socket suggests a soldered, low-profile design suited for compact embedded systems.

The Xeon D-2796TE's 20 cores and 40 threads could theoretically help in heavily parallel workloads that scale linearly with core count, though the recorded Cinebench data shows it still loses multi-core tests. Its 1.25 MB L2 per core is larger than the EPYC's 512 KB per core, which may help in workloads with high L2 locality.

The database does not record any benchmark where the Xeon D-2796TE wins, so its advantages must be inferred from specifications rather than measured performance. For users prioritizing raw benchmark scores, the EPYC 72F3 is the only logical choice. For users prioritizing lower power draw and more cores in a compact form factor, the Xeon D-2796TE offers a different trade-off, though the data does not quantify that trade-off in performance terms.

Both processors sit at the 62nd percentile, meaning they are comparable in overall standing, but the EPYC 72F3's consistent benchmark wins make it the performance leader. The Xeon D-2796TE's higher core count and lower TDP may appeal to specific deployments, but in every measured test, the EPYC 72F3 comes out ahead.