CPU Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7451 and Intel Xeon E-2388G represent two fundamentally different philosophies in server processing: one leans on massive core counts from the Zen architecture, while the other pushes high clock speeds from Rocket Lake. Benchmark results place both at the 61st percentile of all CPUs, yet their average scores diverge slightly, with the EPYC 7451 averaging 5915 and the Xeon E-2388G averaging 5805. This places the EPYC 7451 1.9% ahead of the Xeon E-2388G in the nearestRivals comparison, a margin that reflects the head-to-head results.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows a consistent, narrow victory for the AMD EPYC 7451 across every tested workload, both multi-core and single-core. In Cinebench R15, the EPYC 7451 scores 2061 in multi-core versus 2009 for the Xeon E-2388G, a 2.6% lead. The single-core result is closer: 290 versus 283, also a 2.5% advantage for AMD. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R20, where the EPYC 7451 posts 8589 multi-core and 1212 single-core, compared to 8374 and 1181 for the Intel part, yielding 2.6% deltas in both cases.

Moving to Cinebench R23, the gap remains identical in percentage terms. The EPYC 7451 achieves 20450 in multi-core and 2887 in single-core, while the Xeon E-2388G manages 19939 and 2814 respectively. Again, this is a 2.6% difference favoring AMD on both tests. Notably, the Xeon E-2388G does have additional benchmark data from Geekbench, 9615 multi-core and 2227 single-core, but no comparable Geekbench scores exist for the EPYC 7451 in the data, so a direct comparison there is impossible.

What stands out is the consistency of the 2.6% delta across all six head-to-head benchmarks. This is not a case where one chip wins big in multi-threaded and loses in single-threaded; the EPYC 7451 wins every single test by the same relative margin. The Xeon’s higher boost clock of 5.10 GHz against the EPYC’s 3.20 GHz does not translate into a single-core advantage in Cinebench, which suggests that architectural efficiency per clock plays a significant role. The data shows zero wins for the Intel processor in the head-to-head set, a clean sweep for AMD.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD EPYC 7451 has an average benchmark score of 5915, while the Intel Xeon E-2388G averages 5805. This puts the EPYC 1.9% ahead in the nearestRivals comparison.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The EPYC 7451 scores 20450 versus 19939 for the Xeon E-2388G, a difference of 2.6%. This is the same delta seen in all other Cinebench tests.

Q: Does the Intel processor win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. Out of six head-to-head benchmarks, three Cinebench versions, each with multi-core and single-core tests, the AMD EPYC 7451 wins all six, with no wins recorded for the Intel Xeon E-2388G.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The EPYC 7451 supports eight-channel memory with a bandwidth of 170.6 GB/s, while the Xeon E-2388G uses dual-channel memory with 51.2 GB/s. The EPYC’s bandwidth is over three times higher.

Q: Are both processors in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both are at the 61st percentile versus all CPUs. Despite the EPYC’s higher average score, they rank equally in this broader metric.

Q: Does the Xeon E-2388G have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes UHD Graphics P750. The AMD EPYC 7451 has no integrated graphics listed.

Architecture Differences

The EPYC 7451 is built on AMD’s Zen architecture with the codename Naples, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 24 cores and 48 threads, with a die size of 213 mm² and 4,800 million transistors. In contrast, the Xeon E-2388G uses Intel’s Rocket Lake architecture, specifically Rocket Lake-E, also on a 14 nm process but fabricated by Intel. Its die is larger at 276 mm², yet it houses only 8 cores and 16 threads. The transistor count for the Intel chip is not provided in the data.

Cache configurations differ markedly. The EPYC 7451 has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 64 MB L3 cache. The Xeon E-2388G has 80 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, but only 16 MB of shared L3. This four-fold difference in L3 capacity likely contributes to the EPYC’s ability to match or exceed the Intel chip’s single-core performance despite a much lower boost clock.

Memory architecture is another major split. The EPYC 7451 supports eight-channel DDR4 with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Xeon E-2388G is dual-channel with 51.2 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. PCIe capabilities also differ: the EPYC uses Gen 3, while the Xeon supports Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The EPYC’s socket is AMD Socket SP3, whereas the Xeon uses Intel Socket 1200. The Xeon includes integrated UHD Graphics P750; the EPYC has none.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are the most obvious divergence: 24 cores and 48 threads for the EPYC 7451 versus 8 cores and 16 threads for the Xeon E-2388G. Clock speeds tell a different story, the Xeon starts at 3.20 GHz base and boosts to 5.10 GHz, while the EPYC runs at 2.30 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost. This gives the Intel part a 2.40 GHz higher boost clock and a 0.90 GHz higher base clock.

Thermal design power (TDP) is 180 watts for the EPYC 7451 and 95 watts for the Xeon E-2388G. The EPYC’s higher TDP aligns with its doubled core count. The launch MSRP for the Xeon E-2388G is $539; no launch MSRP is provided for the EPYC 7451. The EPYC 7451 has an unlocked multiplier, while the Xeon’s multiplier is locked. Release dates differ by over four years: the EPYC launched on June 28, 2017, and the Xeon on September 7, 2021.

L3 cache is 64 MB shared on the EPYC versus 16 MB shared on the Xeon. L1 cache per core is 96 KB on AMD and 80 KB on Intel; L2 is identical at 512 KB per core. Memory bus width is eight-channel versus dual-channel, and memory bandwidth is 170.6 GB/s versus 51.2 GB/s. PCIe generation is Gen 3 for AMD and Gen 4 for Intel, with the Intel specifying 20 lanes (CPU only). The part numbers are PS7451BDVHCAF for AMD and SRKMZ for Intel.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7451 wins every benchmark where both were tested, so its strengths are clear. The six Cinebench victories span both multi-core and single-core workloads, indicating that the 24-core design does not sacrifice single-threaded performance to the 8-core Xeon. The 64 MB L3 cache and eight-channel memory bandwidth position the EPYC as the better fit for memory-intensive server workloads, where its 170.6 GB/s bandwidth can feed many concurrent threads. The data also shows it edges out the Xeon E-2388G in the nearestRivals list, sitting 1.9% higher in average score.

The Intel Xeon E-2388G’s wins are not in benchmarks but in specifications that matter for certain deployments. Its 95 W TDP is 85 W lower than the EPYC’s 180 W, which could translate to simpler cooling requirements in dense servers, though the data does not quantify thermal performance. The 5.10 GHz boost clock is the highest in this comparison, and while it did not produce a Cinebench single-core win, it suggests potential in lightly threaded workloads not captured by these tests. The integrated UHD Graphics P750 offers a display output capability that the EPYC lacks entirely, useful for basic server management. Its Gen 4 PCIe support with 20 lanes is a generation ahead of the EPYC’s Gen 3, which could matter for fast NVMe storage or accelerators.

The Geekbench scores for the Xeon E-2388G, 9615 multi-core and 2227 single-core, provide additional data points, but without an EPYC comparison, they cannot be used to declare a win. Overall, the EPYC wins in raw compute across all shared benchmarks, while the Xeon wins in efficiency per watt (based on TDP figures) and platform features like integrated graphics and newer PCIe.

The Verdict

From the data, the AMD EPYC 7451 is the stronger processor for pure compute performance. It leads the Xeon E-2388G by 2.6% in every Cinebench test, from R15 through R23, in both multi-core and single-core modes. Its 24 cores and 48 threads, combined with 64 MB of L3 cache and eight-channel memory, make it the choice for workloads that scale across threads and require high memory bandwidth. The 1.9% average score advantage over the Xeon in the nearestRivals data reinforces this.

The Intel Xeon E-2388G is the pick for scenarios where the EPYC’s advantages are less relevant. Its 95 W TDP is roughly half the EPYC’s 180 W, which the data suggests will result in lower power draw, though exact figures are not provided. The 5.10 GHz boost clock is the fastest in this matchup, and while it did not translate to a Cinebench win, the integrated UHD Graphics P750 and Gen 4 PCIe support offer features the EPYC cannot match. For an 8-core, 16-thread workload that is latency-sensitive and runs on a single socket, the Xeon’s higher clocks and lower TDP could be preferable.

Both processors sit at the 61st percentile of all CPUs, indicating they are closely matched in the broader market. The EPYC’s 5915 average score versus the Xeon’s 5805 is a 1.9% gap, consistent with the head-to-head results. The verdict is straightforward: choose the EPYC 7451 for maximum multi-threaded throughput and memory bandwidth; choose the Xeon E-2388G for lower TDP, integrated graphics, and PCIe Gen 4 support, accepting a 2.6% performance deficit in the tested benchmarks.