AMD EPYC 7371 vs Intel Xeon Gold 6326 Comparison

The Intel Xeon Gold 6326 and AMD EPYC 7371 are both 16-core server processors, but the benchmark data shows a consistent advantage for the Intel part across every recorded test. The Xeon Gold 6326 wins all six Cinebench comparisons, with margins ranging from 6.5% to 6.7%. The average benchmark score further reinforces this, with the Intel chip at 8071 versus 7568 for the AMD EPYC 7371, a gap of roughly 6.6%. The EPYC 7371, while a capable processor in its own right, trails in every single-core and multi-core workload captured in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 6326 scores 27904 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the AMD EPYC 7371 scores 26164. This gives the Intel part a 6.7% advantage in that test.

Q: Does the AMD EPYC 7371 win any benchmark comparisons?

A: No. In the head-to-head data, the Intel Xeon Gold 6326 wins all six recorded Cinebench tests. The database records zero wins for the AMD EPYC 7371 in this comparison.

Q: How do their single-core scores compare in Cinebench R20?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 6326 scores 1654 in Cinebench R20 single-core, and the AMD EPYC 7371 scores 1551. The Intel processor leads by 6.6% in this test.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for both CPUs?

A: Both processors have 16 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Xeon Gold 6326 and the AMD EPYC 7371 are matched on this specification.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 6326 has an average benchmark score of 8071, while the AMD EPYC 7371 has an average benchmark score of 7568. The Intel processor is ahead by approximately 6.6% in this aggregate metric.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon Gold 6326 and the AMD EPYC 7371 have an active production status according to the database.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations and foundries. The Intel Xeon Gold 6326 is built on a 10 nm process node at Intel, using the Ice Lake architecture, specifically Ice Lake-SP. The AMD EPYC 7371 belongs to the EPYC 7001 series and uses the Zen architecture with the codename Naples, manufactured on a 14 nm node at GlobalFoundries. This process node difference is significant, as the Intel part is fabricated on a smaller node, which typically contributes to efficiency and performance characteristics, though the recorded data shows the performance outcomes directly.

The cache configurations differ notably between the two. The Intel Xeon Gold 6326 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD EPYC 7371 has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and a much larger 64 MB of shared L3 cache. Despite the AMD part having a larger L3 cache and more L1 cache per core, the Intel processor still achieves higher benchmark scores. The smaller L2 cache per core on the AMD side, 512 KB versus 1 MB, may play a role in the performance gap observed in the Cinebench tests.

The sockets are incompatible. The Intel Xeon Gold 6326 uses Intel Socket 4189, while the AMD EPYC 7371 uses AMD Socket SP3. The memory support is identical in type and channel count, with both supporting DDR4 memory over an eight-channel memory bus. However, the memory bandwidth figures differ, with the Intel part rated at 204.8 GB/s and the AMD part at 170.6 GB/s. PCIe support also differs, with Intel offering Gen 4 with 64 lanes (CPU only) while AMD offers Gen 3 without a recorded lane count in the database. The Intel Xeon Gold 6326 has a locked multiplier, whereas the AMD EPYC 7371 has an unlocked multiplier, which allows for overclocking on the AMD part if the platform supports it.

The AMD EPYC 7371 has documented transistor and die size figures in the database, with 4,800 million transistors and a die size of 213 mm². The Intel Xeon Gold 6326 does not have these figures recorded. Both processors support ECC memory and are classified in the server and workstation market segment. The release dates differ, with the AMD EPYC 7371 launching earlier in 2018-11-15 and the Intel Xeon Gold 6326 launching later in 2021-04-05.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark results are remarkably consistent. Across all six Cinebench tests, the Intel Xeon Gold 6326 wins by a margin between 6.5% and 6.7%. This uniformity suggests a systematic performance advantage rather than a workload-specific edge.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Intel Xeon Gold 6326 scores 2812 against 2637 for the AMD EPYC 7371, a 6.6% lead. The single-core R15 test shows a similar pattern, with Intel at 396 and AMD at 372, a 6.5% advantage. These are the smallest margins in the comparison, but they still represent a clear win for the Intel part.

The Cinebench R20 results expand the gap slightly. In multi-core, Intel scores 11719 versus 10988 for AMD, a 6.7% difference. In single-core, Intel scores 1654 versus 1551, a 6.6% difference. The Cinebench R23 tests mirror these results. Multi-core R23 shows Intel at 27904 and AMD at 26164, a 6.7% gap. Single-core R23 shows Intel at 3939 and AMD at 3693, also a 6.7% gap.

The consistent delta across all tests indicates that the performance difference is not dependent on the workload type. Whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded, the Intel Xeon Gold 6326 maintains a lead of roughly 6.5% to 6.7% over the AMD EPYC 7371. The average benchmark scores align with this, placing the Intel part at 8071 and the AMD part at 7568. The percentile rankings are close, with the Intel processor at the 64th percentile of all CPUs and the AMD processor at the 63rd percentile, but the direct comparison still favors Intel in every recorded metric.

The nearest rivals for each processor provide additional context. The Intel Xeon Gold 6326 sits near the Intel Xeon Platinum 8180M, which has an average score of 8110, a 0.5% difference, and the Intel Core i3-8100 at 8123, a 0.6% difference. The AMD EPYC 7371 sits near the Intel Core i5-6500 at 7569, a 0% difference, and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX at 7578, a 0.1% difference. These rival comparisons show that the two processors occupy different performance tiers within the database, with the Intel part edging slightly higher in the aggregate rankings.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are identical, with both processors offering 16 cores and 32 threads. The base and boost clocks differ, with the AMD EPYC 7371 having a higher base clock of 3.10 GHz versus 2.90 GHz for the Intel Xeon Gold 6326. The boost clock also favors AMD, at 3.80 GHz versus 3.50 GHz. Despite the clock speed advantage for AMD, the Intel part still wins all benchmarks, which suggests that architectural efficiency and other factors outweigh the raw clock rate.

The thermal design power differs, with the Intel Xeon Gold 6326 rated at 185 watts and the AMD EPYC 7371 at 170 watts. The sockets are different, as are the architectures, codenames, and generations. The process node is 10 nm for Intel and 14 nm for AMD. The foundry is Intel for the Xeon and GlobalFoundries for the EPYC. The cache hierarchy differs in all three levels, with Intel using 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3, while AMD uses 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 64 MB shared L3.

Memory bandwidth is higher on the Intel side at 204.8 GB/s versus 170.6 GB/s. PCIe support differs, with Intel offering Gen 4 with 64 lanes (CPU only) and AMD offering Gen 3 without a lane count. The multiplier unlock status differs, with Intel locked and AMD unlocked. The release dates differ, with AMD launching on 2018-11-15 and Intel on 2021-04-05. The AMD part has a recorded part number, PS7371BEVGPAF, while the Intel part does not have one listed.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The Intel Xeon Gold 6326 is the faster processor in every benchmark recorded in the database. It wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, with each win falling between 6.5% and 6.7%. The average benchmark score confirms this, with Intel at 8071 and AMD at 7568. For applications that rely on single-core performance, such as lightly threaded workloads, the Intel part holds a 6.5% to 6.7% advantage across R15, R20, and R23 single-core tests. For multi-threaded workloads, the Intel part holds the same 6.6% to 6.7% advantage across the multi-core tests.

The AMD EPYC 7371 does have a higher base clock and boost clock, and it has a larger L3 cache, but these advantages do not translate into benchmark wins. The Intel Xeon Gold 6326, with its smaller process node and higher memory bandwidth, delivers better performance in the recorded Cinebench tests. The AMD part also has an unlocked multiplier, which may appeal to users who plan to overclock, but the benchmark data does not include overclocked results.

The choice comes down to the platform and feature priorities. The Intel Xeon Gold 6326 offers PCIe Gen 4 support with 64 lanes, which is a significant advantage for systems that need high-bandwidth I/O. The AMD EPYC 7371 offers PCIe Gen 3 and a larger shared L3 cache. Both support eight-channel DDR4 memory and ECC, making them suitable for server and workstation deployments.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon Gold 6326 wins in all measured performance categories. In single-core Cinebench R15, it scores 396 versus 372, a 6.5% lead. In single-core Cinebench R20, it scores 1654 versus 1551, a 6.6% lead. In single-core Cinebench R23, it scores 3939 versus 3693, a 6.7% lead. The multi-core results follow the same pattern, with leads of 6.6% in R15, 6.7% in R20, and 6.7% in R23. For any workload that is represented by Cinebench, the Intel Xeon Gold 6326 is the better choice.

The AMD EPYC 7371 does not win any recorded benchmark, but it does have qualitative advantages that the Intel part lacks. It has an unlocked multiplier, which means it can be overclocked, whereas the Intel Xeon Gold 6326 is locked. It also has a larger shared L3 cache at 64 MB versus 24 MB, which could benefit certain cache-sensitive workloads, though the recorded Cinebench tests do not show such a benefit. The AMD part has a lower thermal design power at 170 watts versus 185 watts, which may be preferable in power-constrained environments.

For users who prioritize raw benchmark performance, the Intel Xeon Gold 6326 is the clear winner. For users who value overclocking capability, a larger L3 cache, or a lower thermal design power, the AMD EPYC 7371 has features worth considering, but the performance data does not favor it. The Intel part also offers newer PCIe Gen 4 connectivity and higher memory bandwidth, making it a more modern platform overall. The AMD EPYC 7371, despite its earlier release date and higher clock speeds, cannot match the Intel Xeon Gold 6326 in any of the six recorded Cinebench tests.