AMD EPYC 7513 vs Intel Xeon w7-3565X Comparison

The Intel Xeon w7-3565X and AMD EPYC 7513 are both 32-core, 64-thread server/workstation processors, but they come from different generations and platforms. The recorded data shows the Intel part wins 15 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, with an average benchmark score of 118307 against 102244 for the AMD, while both sit at the 97th percentile of all CPUs. The AMD EPYC 7513 counters with wins in data encryption and physics, plus a lower TDP of 200 W versus 335 W.

The Verdict

The Intel Xeon w7-3565X is the faster processor in the vast majority of workloads. It leads by 19.1% across every Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 test, both multi-core and single-core, and by 37.4% in Passmark single-thread. Its wins in floating-point math (44.2%) and extended instructions (52.1%) make it the clear choice for compute-heavy tasks such as scientific simulation, rendering, and code compilation. The AMD EPYC 7513 is not without merit: it wins data encryption by 14.1% and physics by 16.9%, and it draws less power (200 W versus 335 W). For workloads that are heavily dependent on encryption or physics simulation, the EPYC 7513 is the better pick. For everything else, the Xeon w7-3565X is the stronger performer. The Intel part also has an unlocked multiplier, which the AMD lacks, and it supports DDR5 memory with 307.2 GB/s bandwidth versus 204.8 GB/s for the EPYC's DDR4. If raw performance is the priority, the Xeon w7-3565X is the obvious choice. If power efficiency or specific encryption/physics tasks matter more, the EPYC 7513 deserves consideration.

The average benchmark scores place these chips in context. The Xeon w7-3565X's 118307 average is 1.6% above the AMD EPYC 9255 and 1.8% below the AMD EPYC 9384X, while the EPYC 7513's 102244 average is 1.2% above the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX and 3.4% below the Intel Xeon 6521P. Both are firmly in the top tier of available CPUs.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Xeon w7-3565X is built on Intel's 10 nm process (Sapphire Rapids) with a die composed of 4x 477 mm² tiles, while the AMD EPYC 7513 uses TSMC's 7 nm process (Zen 3, Milan) with 8x 81 mm² chiplets and 33,200 million transistors. The Intel part has 80 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2 per core, plus 82.5 MB of shared L3. The AMD part has 64 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, but a much larger 128 MB shared L3. Memory support differs: the Xeon uses DDR5 with an eight-channel bus and 307.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the EPYC uses DDR4 with the same eight-channel width but 204.8 GB/s. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Xeon offers Gen 5 with 112 lanes (CPU only), the EPYC offers Gen 4 with 128 lanes. The Xeon has an unlocked multiplier; the EPYC is locked. The Xeon's TDP is 335 W, the EPYC's is 200 W. The Xeon was released on 2024-08-23, the EPYC on 2021-03-14. The Xeon has no integrated graphics (N/A), the EPYC lists none. The Xeon's part number is SRN73, the EPYC's is 100-000000334100-100000334WOF.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are decisive. The Intel Xeon w7-3565X wins all six Cinebench tests (R15, R20, R23, both multi-core and single-core) by exactly 19.1%. For example, Cinebench R23 multi-core scores 60045 for the Xeon versus 50431 for the EPYC, and single-core 8477 versus 7119. In Passmark, the Xeon leads single-thread by 37.4% (3407 versus 2479) and multithread by 19.1% (70642 versus 59331). The largest margin is in extended instructions, where the Xeon scores 85856 against 56451, a 52.1% advantage. Floating-point math also favors Intel heavily: 218720 versus 151713, a 44.2% lead. Data compression goes to Intel by 15.4% (1075602 versus 932240). Integer math is close, with Intel ahead by 2.6% (279202 versus 272145). Random string sorting sees Intel win by 5.9% (110848 versus 104660), and find prime numbers by 4.7% (398 versus 380). The AMD EPYC 7513 takes two tests: data encryption, where it scores 63628 against 54676, a 14.1% advantage, and physics, where it scores 5118 against 4254, a 16.9% lead. These two wins are notable, but they are isolated. The overall pattern is clear: the Xeon w7-3565X is faster in nearly every measured category, often by large margins.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon w7-3565X boosts to 4.80 GHz, while the AMD EPYC 7513 boosts to 3.65 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports DDR5 memory?

A: The Intel Xeon w7-3565X supports DDR5 with an eight-channel bus and 307.2 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD EPYC 7513 uses DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The AMD EPYC 7513 has 128 MB of shared L3, while the Intel Xeon w7-3565X has 82.5 MB.

Q: Which processor wins in data encryption?

A: The AMD EPYC 7513 wins data encryption with a score of 63628 versus 54676 for the Intel, a 14.1% advantage.

Q: Are both processors in the 97th percentile of all CPUs?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon w7-3565X and the AMD EPYC 7513 are recorded at the 97th percentile.

Q: Which processor has an unlocked multiplier?

A: The Intel Xeon w7-3565X has an unlocked multiplier; the AMD EPYC 7513 is locked.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon w7-3565X wins in 15 of 17 head-to-head tests. Its strongest areas are single-thread performance (37.4% lead), extended instructions (52.1%), floating-point math (44.2%), and all Cinebench workloads (19.1% across the board). This makes it the better choice for rendering, scientific computing, financial modeling, and any workload that relies on high per-core speed or heavy SIMD instructions. It also leads in data compression, integer math, random string sorting, and prime number finding, though by smaller margins. The AMD EPYC 7513 wins in data encryption (14.1%) and physics (16.9%). For workloads that are dominated by encryption, such as secure communications or database encryption, the EPYC has a measurable advantage. The physics win suggests it may be better for certain simulation tasks that use the physics engine. Additionally, the EPYC has a lower TDP (200 W versus 335 W), which can be a deciding factor in power-constrained racks, and it offers more PCIe lanes (128 versus 112), though at Gen 4 rather than Gen 5. The Intel part's higher memory bandwidth (307.2 GB/s versus 204.8 GB/s) and newer DDR5 support give it an edge in memory-intensive applications. In summary, the Xeon w7-3565X is the general-purpose performance leader, while the EPYC 7513 is the specialist for encryption and physics, with a power efficiency advantage.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The Intel Xeon w7-3565X has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, while the AMD EPYC 7513 has a base of 2.60 GHz and a boost of 3.65 GHz. TDP is 335 W for Intel and 200 W for AMD. The Intel part uses Socket 4677, the AMD uses Socket SP3. Process node: Intel 10 nm, AMD 7 nm. Foundry: Intel for the Xeon, TSMC for the EPYC. Die size: Intel 4x 477 mm², AMD 8x 81 mm². Transistors: AMD lists 33,200 million, Intel does not provide a figure. Cache: Intel has 80 KB L1 and 2 MB L2 per core, with 82.5 MB L3; AMD has 64 KB L1 and 512 KB L2 per core, with 128 MB L3. Memory: Intel DDR5, AMD DDR4, both eight-channel, with bandwidth 307.2 GB/s versus 204.8 GB/s. PCIe: Intel Gen 5 with 112 lanes, AMD Gen 4 with 128 lanes. Integrated graphics: Intel lists N/A, AMD lists none. Release date: Intel 2024-08-23, AMD 2021-03-14. Launch MSRP: Intel $2689, AMD $2840. Multiplier: Intel unlocked, AMD locked. Part numbers: Intel SRN73, AMD 100-000000334100-100000334WOF. The Intel part is from the Xeon W (Sapphire Rapids) generation, the AMD from the EPYC 7003 series (Zen 3 Milan).