AMD EPYC 7402 vs Intel Xeon Bronze 3408U Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 7402 dominates the Intel Xeon Bronze 3408U in every recorded test. Across all six Cinebench runs, the EPYC 7402 wins with a consistent delta of approximately -78%, meaning the Xeon Bronze scores about 78% lower in each workload. This is not a narrow margin, it is a generational and core-count gap expressed in every measurement.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 7402 scores 39,110 while the Xeon Bronze 3408U manages 8,473. That is a 78.3% deficit for the Intel part. Single-core R23 shows the same pattern: 5,521 for the EPYC against 1,196 for the Xeon, again a 78.3% difference. The margin holds steady across R15 and R20 as well, with the EPYC posting 3,942 versus 853 in R15 multi-core, and 16,426 versus 3,558 in R20 multi-core. Even the single-core tests, which typically narrow gaps between server parts, show the EPYC at 556 versus 120 in R15 and 2,318 versus 502 in R20.

What does a 78% deficit mean in practical terms? For any render, simulation, or compile workload, the Xeon Bronze will take more than four times as long to finish the same task. The data shows no scenario in these benchmarks where the Intel part is competitive. The EPYC 7402 wins all six head-to-head tests, and the Xeon Bronze records zero wins.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Xeon Bronze 3408U uses the Sapphire Rapids architecture on a 10 nm process, fabricated by Intel. It is part of the Xeon Bronze generation, specifically Sapphire Rapids-SP, and fits the Intel Socket 4677. The AMD EPYC 7402 uses Zen 2 architecture on a 7 nm process, fabricated by TSMC, and belongs to the EPYC 7002 series with the Rome codename. It fits the AMD Socket SP3.

Core and thread counts differ sharply. The Xeon Bronze has 8 cores and 8 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. The EPYC 7402 has 24 cores and 48 threads, a 3x core advantage and 6x thread advantage. Clock speeds also favor AMD: the EPYC runs at 2.80 GHz base and 3.35 GHz boost, while the Xeon Bronze sits at 1.80 GHz base and 1.90 GHz boost. That boost clock difference alone, roughly 76% higher for the EPYC, explains much of the single-core performance gap.

Cache hierarchies are built differently. The Intel part uses 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 22.5 MB of shared L3. The AMD part uses 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a much larger L3 configuration: 32 MB per die, totaling 128 MB. The EPYC also has a transistor count of 15,200 million across four dies, each 74 mm², reflecting its chiplet design. The Xeon Bronze lists no transistor or die size data in the records.

Memory support diverges by generation. The Xeon Bronze uses DDR5 with an eight-channel bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The EPYC 7402 uses DDR4 with an eight-channel bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. Both support ECC memory, which is expected for server parts. PCIe capabilities differ as well: the Intel part offers Gen 5 with 80 lanes, while the AMD part offers Gen 4 with 128 lanes. The Xeon has the newer PCIe standard, but the EPYC has more lanes.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data gives the EPYC 7402 a clean sweep, so the "where each one wins" analysis is mostly about degrees of advantage. In every Cinebench test, the EPYC wins by the same rough margin. The consistency of that 78% gap across both single-core and multi-core tests suggests the Xeon Bronze is not just outgunned on thread count, it is also slower clock-for-clock. The EPYC's higher boost clock and Zen 2 architecture deliver better single-thread performance, while its 24 cores and 48 threads crush multi-threaded workloads.

The Xeon Bronze 3408U does have some qualitative advantages from the specification data, even if they do not show up as benchmark wins. Its DDR5 memory support and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity are newer standards. The memory bandwidth is higher at 256.0 GB/s versus 204.8 GB/s. For workloads that are memory-bandwidth sensitive, such as certain database or analytics tasks, the Xeon's faster memory bus could matter. But the database does not include any memory bandwidth benchmarks, so this remains a theoretical edge, not a measured one.

The EPYC 7402's wins are all measured. It leads in every Cinebench iteration, and the PassMark data for the Xeon Bronze shows it sitting at the 67th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 12,019. The EPYC sits at the 66th percentile with an average score of 11,312. Those averages are close, but the Cinebench head-to-head data is not. The Xeon's PassMark suite includes tests like data compression at 95,714, encryption at 5,274, and integer math at 22,803, but there is no equivalent PassMark data for the EPYC in this record, so direct comparison on those workloads is not possible.

Specification Differences

The two chips differ across nearly every major specification. Core count: 8 versus 24. Thread count: 8 versus 48. Base clock: 1.80 GHz versus 2.80 GHz. Boost clock: 1.90 GHz versus 3.35 GHz. TDP: 125 watts versus 180 watts. Process node: 10 nm versus 7 nm. Foundry: Intel versus TSMC. Socket: Intel Socket 4677 versus AMD Socket SP3. Architecture: Sapphire Rapids versus Zen 2. Codename: Sapphire Rapids versus Rome. Generation: Xeon Bronze (Sapphire Rapids-SP) versus EPYC (Zen 2 (Rome)).

Cache differs in structure and total size. The Xeon has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 22.5 MB L3. The EPYC has 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 128 MB total L3. Memory support: DDR5 versus DDR4. Memory bandwidth: 256.0 GB/s versus 204.8 GB/s. PCIe: Gen 5 with 80 lanes versus Gen 4 with 128 lanes. The EPYC lists transistors at 15,200 million and die size at 4x 74 mm², while the Xeon lists neither. Release dates differ by over three years: the Xeon launched in January 2023, the EPYC in August 2019. Launch MSRP: the Xeon Bronze 3408U is $425, the EPYC 7402 is $1,783.

Both have ECC memory support, neither has integrated graphics, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. Both are marked as Active in production status and target the Server/Workstation market segment.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7402 wins every multi-core test. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 39,110 versus 8,473 for the Intel Xeon Bronze 3408U, a 78.3% advantage.

Q: Is the Intel Xeon Bronze 3408U better in single-core performance?

A: No. The EPYC 7402 also wins all single-core tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC scores 5,521 versus 1,196 for the Xeon, again a 78.3% margin.

Q: What is the core and thread difference?

A: The Xeon Bronze 3408U has 8 cores and 8 threads. The EPYC 7402 has 24 cores and 48 threads.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The EPYC 7402 has 128 MB total L3 (32 MB per die). The Xeon Bronze 3408U has 22.5 MB of L3.

Q: Do both support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both have ECC memory support. However, the Xeon uses DDR5 with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the EPYC uses DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which CPU has more PCIe lanes?

A: The EPYC 7402 offers 128 lanes of PCIe Gen 4. The Xeon Bronze 3408U offers 80 lanes of PCIe Gen 5.

Q: What are the release dates?

A: The Xeon Bronze 3408U was released in January 2023. The EPYC 7402 was released in August 2019.

The Verdict

The data points to one conclusion: choose the AMD EPYC 7402 unless a specific requirement forces the Intel platform. The EPYC wins all six head-to-head benchmarks by the same 78% margin, which means it is faster in both single-threaded and multi-threaded work. It has 3x the cores, 6x the threads, higher base and boost clocks, and more than 5x the L3 cache. For any compute-heavy server workload, rendering task, or virtualization host, the EPYC is the stronger part.

The Xeon Bronze 3408U is not without reasons to exist. It uses newer memory (DDR5) and newer PCIe (Gen 5), and it offers higher memory bandwidth at 256.0 GB/s versus 204.8 GB/s. Its launch MSRP of $425 is lower than the EPYC's $1,783, though the EPYC's 78% performance advantage in every benchmark makes the price difference easy to justify for performance-oriented buyers. It also has a lower TDP at 125 watts versus 180 watts, which matters in dense server environments where power and cooling are constrained.

But the benchmark record is decisive. The EPYC 7402 wins every test, and the Xeon Bronze wins none. If the workload fits within the Xeon's 8 cores and 8 threads, and if DDR5 or PCIe Gen 5 support is a hard requirement, then the Intel part is a viable choice. Otherwise, the EPYC 7402 is the clear pick from the measured data. Its average benchmark score of 11,312 and 66th percentile ranking are close to the Xeon's 12,019 and 67th percentile, but the head-to-head Cinebench results show the real gap under identical workloads. The consistency of that 78% delta across every test makes the verdict straightforward.