AMD EPYC 7371 vs Intel Core i9-10980XE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a remarkably consistent pattern across all six head-to-head comparisons: the Intel Core i9-10980XE wins every single test. The margins are uniform, hovering around 3.5% to 3.7% in favor of Intel. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i9-10980XE scores 2734 against 2637 for the EPYC 7371, a 3.7% advantage. The single-core R15 test tells a similar story, with Intel at 385 and AMD at 372, a 3.5% edge.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the gap remains stable. The Intel part posts 11394 multicore and 1608 single-core, while the EPYC 7371 manages 10988 and 1551 respectively. Both deltas sit at 3.7%. The newest render test in the database, Cinebench R23, repeats the pattern exactly: Intel leads 27130 to 26164 in multicore and 3830 to 3693 in single-core, again a 3.7% difference in both cases.

The consistency of these margins is notable. Across every generation of Cinebench, the relative performance gap does not widen or shrink by more than 0.2 percentage points. This suggests the two processors scale similarly as workload intensity increases, with Intel maintaining a steady advantage rather than pulling ahead in any particular rendering phase.

The aggregate benchmark picture reinforces this. The Intel part averages 7910 across all recorded tests, while the AMD part averages 7568. That places the i9-10980XE in the 64th percentile of all CPUs in the database, just ahead of the EPYC 7371 in the 63rd percentile. The nearest rivals for Intel include the AMD EPYC 7551P at 7952 (0.5% behind Intel) and the Intel Xeon Gold 6326 at 8071 (2% ahead), while the AMD part sits near the Intel Core i5-6500 at 7569 (a 0% delta) and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX at 7578 (0.1% ahead of it). The performance gap between these two chips is real but narrow, and neither one dominates the other by a dramatic margin.

It is also notably the Geekbench results, recorded only for the Intel part, show 14742 multicore and 1453 single-core. These scores sit above the Cinebench averages in relative terms, but without a matching EPYC 7371 Geekbench result in the database, a direct comparison on that workload cannot be drawn.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multicore rendering workloads?

A: The Intel Core i9-10980XE wins every multicore Cinebench test. It leads by 3.7% in R15 (2734 vs 2637), R20 (11394 vs 10988), and R23 (27130 vs 26164).

Q: Is the single-core performance gap similar to the multicore gap?

A: Yes, nearly identical. The Intel part leads by 3.5% in Cinebench R15 single-core (385 vs 372) and by 3.7% in both R20 (1608 vs 1551) and R23 (3830 vs 3693).

Q: How do these chips rank against all CPUs in the database?

A: The Intel Core i9-10980XE sits in the 64th percentile, while the AMD EPYC 7371 sits in the 63rd percentile. Intel's average benchmark score is 7910 versus 7568 for AMD.

Q: What are the closest rivals to each processor?

A: For Intel, the nearest rival is the AMD EPYC 7551P with an average score of 7952, just 0.5% behind. For AMD, the Intel Core i5-6500 is the nearest at 7569, a 0% difference, and the Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX is 0.1% ahead at 7578.

Q: Does the EPYC 7371 win any recorded benchmark?

A: No. The database records six head-to-head benchmarks, and the Intel Core i9-10980XE wins all six. The AMD part's wins count is zero.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: The AMD EPYC 7371 supports 170.6 GB/s over an eight-channel memory bus, while the Intel Core i9-10980XE supports 93.9 GB/s over a quad-channel bus.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-10980XE wins every recorded benchmark, so on pure performance the choice is straightforward. However, examining where each processor excels beyond raw scores reveals different strengths. The i9-10980XE's advantage is consistent across all Cinebench versions, meaning rendering tasks that rely on both multicore throughput and single-core responsiveness will favor Intel. Its boost clock reaches 4.80 GHz compared to 3.80 GHz for the EPYC 7371, which helps explain the single-core edge. For users running a mix of lightly threaded and heavily threaded workloads, the Intel part offers the more balanced profile.

The AMD EPYC 7371, despite losing every benchmark, brings capabilities that matter in specific environments. Its eight-channel memory bus and 170.6 GB/s of bandwidth nearly double the Intel part's 93.9 GB/s. Applications that are memory-bandwidth sensitive, such as large database operations or high-performance computing tasks that stream data, could benefit more from the AMD platform even if raw CPU compute scores are lower. The EPYC 7371 also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the Intel side, which makes it suitable for server environments where data integrity is non-negotiable.

The socket difference also defines use cases. The Intel part uses Intel Socket 2066, a desktop-oriented platform, while the AMD part uses AMD Socket SP3, a server platform. The Intel chip targets desktop and workstation builds, while the EPYC targets server racks. A user building a single-socket workstation with high clock speeds would prefer the i9-10980XE, while a data center deploying a server with memory-heavy workloads would likely favor the EPYC 7371 despite its slightly lower compute scores.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The Intel Core i9-10980XE has 18 cores and 36 threads, while the AMD EPYC 7371 has 16 cores and 32 threads. Intel's base clock is 3.00 GHz with a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, whereas AMD runs at 3.10 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost. The Intel part has a higher peak frequency, but the AMD part starts from a slightly higher base.

Thermal design power differs modestly: Intel is rated at 165 W, AMD at 170 W. The memory bus configuration is a major split, with Intel using quad-channel DDR4 and AMD using eight-channel DDR4. Memory bandwidth follows accordingly, at 93.9 GB/s for Intel and 170.6 GB/s for AMD. ECC memory support is present on the AMD part but not on the Intel part.

PCIe capabilities also differ. Intel lists Gen 3 with 48 lanes (CPU only), while AMD lists Gen 3 without a lane count specified. The Intel part has an unlocked multiplier, and so does the AMD part. Release dates are roughly a year apart, with the EPYC 7371 launching in November 2018 and the i9-10980XE in October 2019. The Intel part is marked end-of-life, while the AMD part remains active in production. The Intel part carries a launch MSRP of $1076.

Architecture Differences

Both chips are built on a 14 nm process, but they come from different foundries. Intel fabricates the i9-10980XE in-house, while GlobalFoundries produces the EPYC 7371. The Intel architecture is Cascade Lake, specifically Cascade Lake-X, part of the Core i9 Extreme line in the 10th Gen X-Series. The AMD architecture is Zen, under the codename Naples, part of the EPYC 7001 series.

The cache layouts diverge significantly. Intel uses 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 24.75 MB of shared L3. AMD uses 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3. The total L3 cache is notably larger on the AMD side, which could benefit workloads with large working sets. The transistor count and die size are listed only for the AMD part: 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die.

The Intel part's 48 PCIe lanes are explicitly listed as CPU-only, which gives it an edge in direct device connectivity for a desktop platform. The AMD part does not specify lane counts in the database, making a direct comparison impossible. Both processors have no integrated graphics, so a discrete GPU is required for display output on either platform.

The memory controllers reflect the platforms' different design goals. Intel's quad-channel setup is typical for high-end desktop, while AMD's eight-channel setup aligns with server memory requirements. The EPYC 7371's ECC support further cements its server orientation, while the i9-10980XE's lack of ECC aligns it with consumer and prosumer desktop use.

The Verdict

The benchmark data makes one thing clear: the Intel Core i9-10980XE is the faster processor in every recorded test. It wins all six head-to-head benchmarks with margins between 3.5% and 3.7%, and its average benchmark score of 7910 beats the EPYC 7371's 7568 by roughly 4.5%. The Intel part also holds a higher percentile rank, 64th versus 63rd, and its nearest rivals in the database include server-class parts like the EPYC 7551P and Xeon Gold 6326, indicating it competes above its desktop classification.

Users who prioritize raw compute performance, especially in rendering workloads measured by Cinebench, should choose the Intel Core i9-10980XE. Its higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz and 18-core configuration give it a consistent edge in both single-threaded and multi-threaded tasks. The unlocked multiplier allows overclocking, and the 48 PCIe lanes provide ample connectivity for a high-end workstation.

Users who need server-grade features should choose the AMD EPYC 7371. The eight-channel memory bus with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth, ECC support, and active production status make it the more appropriate choice for data center deployment. Its larger 64 MB L3 cache and higher base clock of 3.10 GHz offer advantages in memory-intensive and sustained server workloads. The lower single-core and multicore scores are a trade-off, but the platform-level features may matter more in a server context.

The data does not support a universal recommendation. For desktop and workstation users chasing every last point of render performance, the Intel part wins outright. For server operators who need ECC memory, high memory bandwidth, and a platform still in active production, the EPYC 7371 offers capabilities the Intel part simply does not have. The two chips target different environments, and the benchmark scores reflect only a slice of what each platform can do.