AMD EPYC 72F3 vs Intel Xeon Gold 5317 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a strikingly close contest between the Intel Xeon Gold 5317 and the AMD EPYC 72F3. Across every single Cinebench test in the dataset, the Intel Xeon Gold 5317 emerges as the winner, though by margins so narrow they border on statistical noise. The largest delta is a mere 0.3% in Cinebench R15 single-core, with all other deltas sitting at 0.2% or 0.1%. The average benchmark scores tell the same story: the Intel part averages 6710, while the AMD part averages 6700, a difference of just 0.2%. Both processors sit at the 62nd percentile of all CPUs, confirming they are functionally equivalent in overall performance. The verdict from the data is that raw compute output should not be the deciding factor. The Intel Xeon Gold 5317 offers this near-identical performance with a lower TDP of 150 watts compared to 180 watts for the AMD EPYC 72F3. It also provides 12 cores and 24 threads versus 8 cores and 16 threads, which matters for workloads that scale with thread count. The AMD EPYC 72F3 counters with substantially higher clock speeds — 3.70 GHz base and 4.10 GHz boost versus 3.00 GHz and 3.60 GHz — and a massive 256 MB of shared L3 cache compared to 18 MB. For buyers prioritizing raw throughput per socket, the data shows either chip will deliver nearly identical results. For buyers prioritizing thread count and power efficiency, the Intel part holds the edge. For buyers prioritizing maximum cache and the highest possible clock speeds, the AMD part is the clear choice. The AMD EPYC 72F3 has a launch MSRP of $2468.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 5317 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the AMD EPYC 72F3 has 8 cores and 16 threads. Despite this 50% core-count advantage for Intel, the multi-core benchmark scores are nearly identical, with Intel leading by only 0.2% in Cinebench R23 multi-core (23199 vs 23164).

Q: How do the single-core performances compare?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 5317 wins every single-core test in the dataset, but by the slimmest of margins. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 3275 versus AMD's 3270, a 0.2% difference. In Cinebench R15 single-core, Intel leads 330 to 329, a 0.3% delta. The AMD EPYC 72F3's higher boost clock of 4.10 GHz does not translate into a measurable single-core advantage in these results.

Q: What is the difference in L3 cache capacity?

A: The AMD EPYC 72F3 has a shared L3 cache of 256 MB, which is dramatically larger than the Intel Xeon Gold 5317's 18 MB shared L3 cache. This is a 14x difference in cache capacity, yet the benchmark results do not show AMD leveraging this advantage into superior scores.

Q: Which processor consumes less power?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 5317 has a TDP of 150 watts, while the AMD EPYC 72F3 has a TDP of 180 watts. The Intel part delivers essentially identical benchmark scores while drawing 30 fewer watts according to the TDP specifications.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth specifications for each chip?

A: Both processors support DDR4 memory with an eight-channel memory bus. The AMD EPYC 72F3 has a higher memory bandwidth rating at 204.8 GB/s, compared to 187.7 GB/s for the Intel Xeon Gold 5317.

Q: How does PCIe lane count differ between the two?

A: The AMD EPYC 72F3 provides 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel Xeon Gold 5317 provides 64 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only). This gives AMD a 2x advantage in PCIe lane count, which is significant for systems with many expansion cards or NVMe drives.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Xeon Gold 5317 is built on Intel's 10 nm process node and fabricated by Intel, using the Ice Lake-SP architecture from the Xeon Gold generation. It features 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core, with an 18 MB shared L3 cache. The AMD EPYC 72F3, in contrast, is built on TSMC's 7 nm process node and uses the Zen 3 (Milan) architecture. It contains 33,200 million transistors across a die size of 8x 81 mm². Its cache hierarchy is notably different: 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 256 MB of shared L3 cache. The process node difference is significant — Intel's 10 nm versus AMD's 7 nm — and this helps explain the AMD chip's higher clock speeds of 3.70 GHz base and 4.10 GHz boost. The Intel chip's lower clocks of 3.00 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost are offset by its higher core count. Both processors use eight-channel DDR4 memory, and both support ECC memory. The AMD part offers 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, double the 64 lanes on the Intel part. Both are manufactured for the server/workstation market segment and are currently listed as Active in production status.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several key specification fields. The Intel Xeon Gold 5317 has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the AMD EPYC 72F3 has 8 cores and 16 threads. Clock speeds differ substantially: the Intel part runs at 3.00 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost, while the AMD part runs at 3.70 GHz base and 4.10 GHz boost. TDP ratings show the Intel chip at 150 watts and the AMD chip at 180 watts. The socket types are incompatible — Intel Socket 4189 versus AMD Socket SP3. The process nodes differ (10 nm Intel versus 7 nm TSMC), as do the architectures (Ice Lake-SP versus Zen 3 Milan). L2 cache per core favors Intel at 1 MB versus AMD's 512 KB, but L3 cache massively favors AMD at 256 MB shared versus Intel's 18 MB shared. Memory bandwidth differs slightly, with AMD rated at 204.8 GB/s and Intel at 187.7 GB/s. PCIe lane counts differ by 2x: 128 lanes for AMD versus 64 for Intel. The AMD part has a listed part number of 100-000000327100-100000327WOF and a launch MSRP of $2468, while the Intel part has no launch MSRP listed. The AMD EPYC 72F3 was released on 2021-03-14, and the Intel Xeon Gold 5317 was released on 2021-04-05.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results show a clean sweep for the Intel Xeon Gold 5317 across all six Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, Intel scores 2338 versus AMD's 2334, a 0.2% delta. The single-core R15 test sees Intel ahead at 330 versus 329, a 0.3% delta — the largest margin of any test. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows Intel at 9743 versus AMD's 9728, again a 0.2% delta. The R20 single-core test has Intel at 1375 versus AMD's 1373, a 0.1% delta, the narrowest margin recorded. Cinebench R23 multi-core continues the pattern: Intel at 23199 versus AMD's 23164, a 0.2% delta. Finally, R23 single-core has Intel at 3275 versus AMD's 3270, a 0.2% delta. The data shows that the AMD EPYC 72F3's higher clock speeds do not produce a win in any benchmark, and the Intel chip's higher core count does not produce a significant win in multi-core tests either. The results suggest that the two architectures reach a near-parity equilibrium for Cinebench workloads. The average benchmark scores reinforce this: Intel's 6710 versus AMD's 6700, with the nearest rival Intel Xeon D-2775TE scoring 6711. The AMD EPYC 72F3's rival list shows a delta of -0.1% relative to the Intel Xeon Gold 5317, confirming the negligible performance gap.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon Gold 5317 wins every benchmark in this dataset, but the practical significance of these wins is minimal given the tiny deltas. The Intel part's genuine advantages lie in its specification sheet. It offers 4 additional cores and 8 additional threads, which becomes relevant in workloads that can utilize more threads. Its TDP of 150 watts is 30 watts lower than the AMD chip's 180 watts, making it a more power-efficient option for dense server deployments where cooling and power budgets are constrained. The Intel part also has 1 MB of L2 cache per core, double the 512 KB per core on the AMD chip, which can benefit certain latency-sensitive workloads.

The AMD EPYC 72F3 wins on clock speed, with a 3.70 GHz base and 4.10 GHz boost, and it wins decisively on L3 cache with 256 MB versus 18 MB. This cache advantage is the single largest specification difference between the two processors. AMD also doubles the PCIe lane count to 128 versus 64, which is a major advantage for systems requiring many GPUs, NVMe storage devices, or high-speed networking cards. The AMD chip's memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s exceeds Intel's 187.7 GB/s, and its 7 nm process node represents a more advanced manufacturing technology. For workloads that are heavily dependent on massive L3 cache residency, such as certain database or virtualization workloads, the AMD chip's architecture provides a theoretical advantage that the Cinebench suite does not capture. For workloads that scale with core count, the Intel chip's 12 cores provide headroom that the 8-core AMD chip cannot match. The data shows that for Cinebench specifically, these architectural differences cancel out almost perfectly. The selection between these two processors should therefore be driven by system-level requirements: power efficiency and thread count favor Intel, while cache capacity, PCIe expandability, and raw clock speed favor AMD.