AMD EPYC 7352 vs Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern in the head-to-head data is the AMD EPYC 7352's dominance across every Cinebench iteration, both single-core and multi-core. In all six Cinebench tests (R15, R20, and R23), the EPYC 7352 wins by exactly 16.8%. For example, in Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 34,314 versus the Xeon Platinum 8270's 28,561. The single-core R23 gap is similarly consistent: 4,844 versus 4,032. This uniformity suggests a fundamental per-clock or per-core efficiency advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The passmark suite tells a more fragmented story. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 takes seven wins, while the EPYC 7352 takes ten. Intel's largest victory is in PassMark single-thread, where it scores 2,325 against AMD's 1,979, a 17.5% margin. Intel also wins extended instructions by 27.3% (51,191 versus 40,203) and random string sorting by 15.9% (80,208 versus 69,231). Data compression goes to Intel by 10.2% (728,144 versus 660,712), floating point math by 13% (99,432 versus 87,969), and integer math by 7.9% (160,322 versus 148,605).

AMD's passmark wins are far more dramatic in percentage terms. Data encryption is a complete blowout: the EPYC 7352 scores 44,426 versus Intel's 8,798, an 80.2% advantage. Find prime numbers goes AMD's way by 72.1% (301 versus 84). Physics simulation is another huge win, 2,688 versus 903, a 66.4% margin. The multithread score favors AMD by 25.7% (40,370 versus 29,986). These aren't marginal differences; they represent entirely different performance profiles.

The wins distribution (7 for Intel, 10 for AMD) is less important than the magnitude. Intel's wins are mostly in the single-digit to mid-teen percentage range, while AMD's wins include three tests where it doubles or nearly doubles Intel's output. The Cinebench results, though uniform at 16.8%, show AMD ahead in the most commonly cited rendering benchmarks. The data implies that if a workload relies on encryption, prime number generation, physics, or broad multithreaded rendering, the EPYC 7352 is the clear choice. If the workload is more about string sorting, extended instruction sets, or single-threaded integer tasks, the Xeon Platinum 8270 holds its ground.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 uses Cascade Lake-SP, built on Intel's 14 nm process with 8,000 million transistors. The AMD EPYC 7352 uses Zen 2 (Rome) on TSMC's 7 nm process with 15,200 million transistors. The node difference is significant: 7 nm versus 14 nm, which helps explain AMD's efficiency in the benchmark data. The EPYC also uses a chiplet design, with four dies each measuring 74 mm², whereas Intel's monolithic die size is not recorded in the database.

Core counts differ but not drastically: Intel has 26 cores and 52 threads, AMD has 24 cores and 48 threads. Despite having fewer cores, AMD wins every Cinebench test. This points to a higher instructions-per-clock (IPC) on Zen 2. Cache layouts diverge sharply. Intel uses 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 35.75 MB shared L3. AMD uses 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and a much larger 32 MB per die L3, totaling 128 MB. That 128 MB versus 35.75 MB L3 difference likely explains AMD's massive lead in data encryption and prime number finding, both of which can benefit from larger working sets in cache.

Memory support is DDR4 for both, with ECC on both. AMD lists an eight-channel memory bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel's memory bus and bandwidth are not recorded. AMD also lists PCIe Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only), while Intel's PCIe details are absent. The base and boost clocks favor Intel: 2.70 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost versus AMD's 2.30 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost. Yet AMD still wins single-core Cinebench, reinforcing that clock speed alone doesn't determine performance. The TDP also differs: Intel at 205 W, AMD at 155 W. AMD achieves better performance in most tests while drawing less power, per the recorded TDP values.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD EPYC 7352 scores 34,314 versus the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270's 28,561, a 16.8% advantage for AMD.

Q: Is there any test where Intel wins by a large margin?

A: Intel's biggest wins are 27.3% in extended instructions (51,191 versus 40,203) and 17.5% in PassMark single-thread (2,325 versus 1,979). No Intel win exceeds 27.3%.

Q: How much faster is AMD in data encryption?

A: The EPYC 7352 scores 44,426 in PassMark data encryption versus Intel's 8,798, an 80.2% advantage. This is the largest single-test gap in the entire benchmark set.

Q: Does Intel's higher boost clock help it win any single-core tests?

A: Intel wins PassMark single-thread (2,325 versus 1,979), but AMD wins all three Cinebench single-core tests (R15, R20, R23) by 16.8% each, despite Intel's higher 4.00 GHz boost versus AMD's 3.20 GHz.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: Intel has 26 cores and 52 threads. AMD has 24 cores and 48 threads. AMD wins most benchmarks despite having fewer cores and threads.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: AMD has 128 MB total L3 (32 MB per die), while Intel has 35.75 MB shared L3. AMD's L3 is over 3.5 times larger.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every hardware specification. Intel uses Cascade Lake-SP on a 14 nm process with 8,000 million transistors. AMD uses Zen 2 (Rome) on a 7 nm process with 15,200 million transistors. Intel's socket is Intel Socket 3647, AMD's is AMD Socket SP3. Core counts: 26 versus 24. Threads: 52 versus 48. Base clock: 2.70 GHz versus 2.30 GHz. Boost clock: 4.00 GHz versus 3.20 GHz. TDP: 205 W versus 155 W.

Cache structures are entirely different. Intel has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 35.75 MB shared L3. AMD has 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 32 MB per die L3 totaling 128 MB. Memory support is DDR4 for both, but AMD specifies an eight-channel bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel lists no memory bus or bandwidth. PCIe is listed for AMD only: Gen 4, 128 lanes (CPU only). Intel's PCIe is not recorded.

Release dates differ by about eight months: Intel on December 10, 2018, AMD on August 6, 2019. AMD's production status is "Active," while Intel's is not recorded. AMD has a launch MSRP of $1350, which can be stated once. Intel's launch MSRP is null. Both are locked (multiplier unlocked: false). AMD's part number is 100-000000077, Intel's is SRF96CD8069504195201. Both target the server/workstation market segment.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 wins in PassMark single-thread (2,325 versus 1,979), which suggests it handles lightly threaded integer tasks better. It also wins in extended instructions (51,191 versus 40,203), indicating a strength in workloads that use specialized instruction sets like AVX or similar. Random string sorting (80,208 versus 69,231) and data compression (728,144 versus 660,712) are also Intel wins. Floating point math (99,432 versus 87,969) and integer math (160,322 versus 148,605) round out Intel's victories. These are classic compute-heavy, memory-light tasks.

The AMD EPYC 7352 wins every Cinebench test, meaning any rendering or multi-core CPU-bound workload is better served by AMD. The data encryption result (44,426 versus 8,798) is so lopsided that any security-related, cryptographic, or SSL/TLS-heavy workload should strongly favor AMD. Find prime numbers (301 versus 84) points to AMD's advantage in algorithms with high memory pressure or branch-heavy loops. Physics simulation (2,688 versus 903) suggests AMD is better for physics engines in simulation or gaming server contexts. The multithread score (40,370 versus 29,986) confirms AMD's overall throughput advantage in mixed parallel workloads.

The pattern is clear: AMD wins where cache capacity or per-core efficiency matters most, and it wins in the most CPU-intensive rendering tests. Intel wins where raw clock speed (its 4.00 GHz boost) or specific instruction extensions matter. If a workload is heavy on encryption, physics, or general multi-core rendering, the EPYC 7352 is the data-supported choice. If the workload involves heavy integer math, floating point arrays, or single-threaded legacy code, the Xeon Platinum 8270 holds a measurable lead.

The Verdict

The benchmark data consistently points to the AMD EPYC 7352 as the stronger overall processor. It wins 10 of 17 head-to-head tests, including every Cinebench test and the three largest margin wins (encryption, prime numbers, physics). The uniform 16.8% Cinebench advantage across all versions and both single and multi-core tests suggests a fundamental architecture superiority. AMD achieves this while having fewer cores (24 versus 26), lower clocks (2.30 GHz base, 3.20 GHz boost versus 2.70/4.00), and a lower TDP (155 W versus 205 W). The 128 MB L3 cache versus 35.75 MB is the most plausible explanation for the encryption and prime number blowouts.

The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 is not without merit. It wins 7 tests, and its single-thread PassMark score (2,325 versus 1,979) shows it can outrun AMD in some lightly threaded scenarios. Its extended instructions win (27.3%) and floating point math win (13%) indicate it handles SIMD-heavy and math-heavy code well. For workloads that are specifically single-threaded, integer-sorting, or dependent on older instruction sets, Intel's chip is competitive.

However, the magnitude of AMD's wins dwarfs Intel's. An 80.2% encryption lead, a 72.1% prime number lead, and a 66.4% physics lead are not minor edges. They represent workload categories where Intel is less than half as fast. The average benchmark score in the database confirms this: Intel's average is 71,370, AMD's is 68,118, but that average is skewed by Intel's massive data compression score and AMD's encryption score pulling its average down. The percentile rank is identical for both (94th percentile), meaning both are top-tier chips in the overall CPU landscape.

For a buyer choosing between these two, the data says: choose the AMD EPYC 7352 if you care about rendering, encryption, physics, or any multi-threaded server workload. Choose the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 if your application is dominated by single-threaded integer tasks, string sorting, or extended instruction set usage, and if you prefer Intel's higher clock speeds. The EPYC 7352 offers better performance in the most demanding and common server tasks, while the Xeon 8270 is a specialized tool for specific math and single-thread workloads. Based on the recorded benchmarks alone, AMD is the more versatile and higher-performing processor in this matchup.