AMD EPYC 7601 vs Intel Xeon Gold 5320 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clean sweep for the Intel Xeon Gold 5320 across all six Cinebench comparisons. The Intel part wins every multi-core and single-core test, with the margin holding remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon Gold 5320 scores 3217 against 3003 for the AMD EPYC 7601, a 7.1% advantage. The single-core R15 result is slightly wider: 454 versus 423, a 7.3% lead. That near-identical delta pattern repeats through the newer test suites.

Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 13408 for the Intel chip versus 12516 for the EPYC, again a 7.1% gap. Single-core R20 lands at 1892 against 1766, also 7.1%. The R23 results continue the trend: 31924 versus 29800 in multi-core, and 4506 versus 4207 in single-core, both at 7.1%. The consistency of these deltas is notable. It suggests the performance difference is structural, not workload-specific, a function of per-core efficiency and sustained clock behavior rather than a single benchmark quirk.

The average benchmark score in the database reinforces the picture. The Xeon Gold 5320 carries an average score of 9234, while the EPYC 7601 sits at 8619. That is a gap of roughly 7%, which aligns with the head-to-head deltas. Interestingly, the nearest rivals for the Intel part include the Intel Xeon Platinum 8280M at 9260, a 0.3% higher score, and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X at 9284, 0.5% higher. The EPYC 7601, by contrast, sits among mobile-oriented parts in its nearest-rival list: the Intel Core i7-10510U at 8580, only 0.5% lower, and the Intel Core i5-8250U at 8577, 0.5% lower. The EPYC's closest competitor in the database is just above it, the Intel Core i7-8565U at 8665, 0.5% higher. This placement is a reminder that the EPYC 7601, despite its server pedigree, scores in line with upper-tier laptop silicon in the aggregate benchmark metric.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon Gold 5320 wins every measured benchmark, so the use-case split is largely about which workload categories those six tests represent. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 are render workloads that stress both multi-core throughput and single-thread responsiveness. The Intel part leads in all three generations of the test, which means it holds the advantage in both heavily threaded rendering and lightly threaded interaction or preview tasks.

For multi-core render farms or batch workloads, the Xeon Gold 5320 delivers 7.1% more throughput in R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests. That translates directly to shorter wall-clock times for CPU-based rendering, simulation, or encoding jobs that scale across all available threads. The EPYC 7601 does offer more cores, 32 versus 26, but the Intel part still comes out ahead in aggregate multi-core score. This indicates that per-core efficiency and clock behavior outweigh the raw core count difference in these tests.

Single-core workloads also favor the Intel chip. The 7.3% lead in R15 single-core and 7.1% leads in R20 and R23 single-core mean that lightly threaded tasks, such as legacy application code, scripting, or single-threaded compilation stages, will complete faster on the Xeon Gold 5320. The EPYC 7601 has no benchmark category where it wins, so there is no measured workload in the database that favors the AMD part. Users who rely on Cinebench as a proxy for general CPU throughput would see no reason to choose the EPYC 7601 based on these numbers.

The EPYC 7601 does have a higher core count and a larger shared L3 cache, 64 MB versus 39 MB, but the benchmark data does not translate that into a performance win in any of the six recorded tests. The Intel Xeon Gold 5320 also matches the EPYC's base clock at 2.20 GHz and exceeds its boost clock, 3.40 GHz versus 3.20 GHz, which helps explain the consistent single-core advantage.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the Intel Xeon Gold 5320 is the faster processor in every benchmark the database records. It beats the AMD EPYC 7601 by 7.1% in five of six tests and by 7.3% in one. The average benchmark score also favors Intel, 9234 versus 8619. A server or workstation buyer choosing between these two parts on measured performance alone would select the Xeon Gold 5320 without hesitation.

The EPYC 7601 should be considered only in contexts where its specific platform attributes matter more than raw Cinebench scores. It offers 32 cores and 64 threads, which is a higher thread count than the Xeon's 26 cores and 52 threads. It also has a larger L3 cache, 64 MB, and an unlocked multiplier, an unusual feature for a server part. However, none of those attributes produce a win in the recorded benchmarks. The Intel part achieves higher scores despite fewer cores, which points to superior per-core execution in the Cinebench workloads.

For buyers prioritizing single-thread responsiveness, the Xeon Gold 5320 is clearly ahead. For buyers prioritizing multi-core render throughput, the same is true. The EPYC 7601 does not win any measured category. The verdict from the database is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon Gold 5320 is the recommended part for performance-sensitive server and workstation deployments, based strictly on the benchmark results.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 5320 scores 31924, while the AMD EPYC 7601 scores 29800. The Intel part leads by 7.1%.

Q: Is the AMD EPYC 7601 ever faster than the Intel Xeon Gold 5320 in any recorded test?

A: No. The Intel Xeon Gold 5320 wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, with deltas of 7.1% or 7.3% depending on the test.

Q: How do the core counts compare between the two processors?

A: The AMD EPYC 7601 has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the Intel Xeon Gold 5320 has 26 cores and 52 threads. Despite fewer cores, the Intel part wins all multi-core benchmarks.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds for each processor?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 5320 boosts to 3.40 GHz, while the AMD EPYC 7601 boosts to 3.20 GHz. Both have a base clock of 2.20 GHz.

Q: Which processor has the larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD EPYC 7601 has 64 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Xeon Gold 5320 has 39 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger cache does not translate into a benchmark win for the EPYC.

Q: How does the average benchmark score compare?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 5320 has an average benchmark score of 9234, versus 8619 for the AMD EPYC 7601. The Intel part is roughly 7% higher.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design eras and foundries. The Intel Xeon Gold 5320 uses the Ice Lake-SP architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process. The AMD EPYC 7601 uses the Zen architecture, codenamed Naples, built on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process. The process node difference is significant: 10 nm versus 14 nm, which contributes to the Intel part's higher boost clock and better per-core efficiency in the recorded benchmarks.

The core topology also differs. The Xeon Gold 5320 has 26 cores and 52 threads, with 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core. Its L3 cache is 39 MB shared. The EPYC 7601 has 32 cores and 64 threads, with 96 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core. Its L3 cache is 64 MB shared. The EPYC has a larger total cache footprint, but the Xeon has a larger per-core L2 allocation, which may contribute to its single-core performance advantage.

Memory support is similar in breadth but different in bandwidth. Both support DDR4 memory with eight-channel memory buses. The Xeon Gold 5320 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 191.6 GB/s, while the EPYC 7601 has 170.6 GB/s. The Intel part holds a bandwidth advantage of roughly 12%. Both support ECC memory, which is expected for server platforms.

PCIe capabilities differ by generation. The Xeon Gold 5320 supports PCIe Gen 4 with 64 lanes available from the CPU. The EPYC 7601 supports PCIe Gen 3, with no lane count specified in the database. This is a meaningful platform difference for I/O-intensive workloads, as Gen 4 doubles the per-lane bandwidth compared to Gen 3.

The socket and platform are entirely different. The Xeon Gold 5320 uses Intel Socket 4189, while the EPYC 7601 uses AMD Socket SP3. The EPYC 7601 has an unlocked multiplier, a feature rarely seen in server processors, while the Xeon Gold 5320 is locked. The EPYC is also older, with a release date of June 2017, versus April 2021 for the Xeon. The EPYC 7601 is part of the EPYC 7001 series and is fabricated with 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. The Intel part has no transistor or die size data recorded.

The production status for both is listed as active, so neither is discontinued. Both target the server and workstation market segment. The EPYC 7601's part number is PS7601BDVIHAF. The Xeon Gold 5320 has no part number recorded. Neither part has a launch MSRP in the database, and neither includes integrated graphics. The architectural differences, particularly the process node, memory bandwidth, and PCIe generation, explain much of the measured performance split, even though the EPYC fields more cores and a larger L3 cache.