AMD EPYC 7763 vs Intel Xeon 678X Comparison

The Intel Xeon 678X and AMD EPYC 7763 are two server processors aimed at the same high-end workstation and data center segment, but they represent vastly different design philosophies and generational eras. The data shows the Intel Xeon 678X, a 2026 Granite Rapids part, decisively outperforms the 2021 Zen 3-based EPYC 7763 in the majority of tested workloads. The Xeon 678X wins 13 of the 16 head-to-head benchmarks, including every Cinebench test and most PassMark tests, with particularly strong showings in single-threaded and extended instruction workloads. However, the older AMD chip fights back in specific areas like integer math, data encryption, and random string sorting, proving that raw core count still matters for certain tasks. The verdict is clear: for general compute, rendering, and floating-point-heavy tasks, the Intel Xeon 678X is the superior choice based on benchmark data, while the AMD EPYC 7763 retains a narrow edge only in specialized encryption and integer-heavy workloads.

The Verdict

The benchmark data identifies the Intel Xeon 678X as the outright performance leader in this matchup. With a 99th percentile ranking versus the EPYC 7763’s 98th, the Intel part sits at the very top of the CPU hierarchy. Its average benchmark score of 193,477 is 7.5% higher than the AMD chip’s 179,916. In multi-core Cinebench R23, the Xeon 678X scores 83,775 against the EPYC 7763’s 71,902, a 16.5% advantage. The single-core results are even more lopsided: the Xeon 678X leads by 49.2% in PassMark single-thread testing (3,758 vs 2,518) and by 16.5% in Cinebench R15 single-core (1,192 vs 1,023). This makes the Xeon 678X the clear pick for workloads that demand high per-core performance, such as database transaction processing, front-end web serving, or lightly threaded engineering simulations. The Xeon 678X also dominates in floating-point math, scoring 362,070 versus 287,919 (25.8% ahead), and in extended instruction workloads, where its 141,431 score is 43.9% higher than the EPYC’s 98,294.

The AMD EPYC 7763 should only be chosen if the workload specifically favors its three benchmark wins. It leads in PassMark data encryption by a massive 30.9% margin (121,001 vs 83,598), in integer math by 21.6% (516,920 vs 405,075), and in random string sorting by 10.2% (182,676 vs 164,102). For these tasks, the EPYC 7763’s 64 cores and 128 threads provide an advantage that the Xeon 678X’s 48 cores and 96 threads cannot match. The EPYC 7763 also has a larger 256 MB L3 cache compared to the Xeon’s 192 MB, which may contribute to its sorting and integer performance. Beyond these niche workloads, the data does not support choosing the EPYC 7763. Even in multi-threaded PassMark, the Xeon 678X wins by 16.5% (98,559 vs 84,591), despite having fewer cores. The Xeon 678X’s higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz versus 3.50 GHz on the EPYC, and its newer 5 nm process versus 7 nm, enable it to overcome the core count deficit.

The launch MSRP for the Intel Xeon 678X is $3749, while the AMD EPYC 7763 launched at $7890. The data shows the Intel part not only outperforms but does so at a lower launch price point, making it the logical choice for new server deployments where performance is the primary metric.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon 678X has an average benchmark score of 193,477, which is 7.5% higher than the AMD EPYC 7763’s 179,916.

Q: How does the AMD EPYC 7763 perform in encryption workloads?

A: The EPYC 7763 wins the PassMark data encryption test decisively, scoring 121,001 against the Xeon 678X’s 83,598, a 30.9% advantage for AMD.

Q: Is the Intel Xeon 678X faster in single-threaded performance?

A: Yes, and by a wide margin. The Xeon 678X scores 3,758 in PassMark single-thread, which is 49.2% higher than the EPYC 7763’s 2,518. It also leads in Cinebench R15 single-core by 16.5%.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The AMD EPYC 7763 has 64 cores and 128 threads, while the Intel Xeon 678X has 48 cores and 96 threads. Despite fewer cores, the Xeon wins the passmark multithread test by 16.5%.

Q: Which processor supports faster memory?

A: The Intel Xeon 678X supports DDR5 with a memory bandwidth of 409.6 GB/s, while the AMD EPYC 7763 supports DDR4 with a memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. Both use an eight-channel memory bus.

Q: In which benchmarks does the AMD EPYC 7763 outperform the Intel Xeon 678X?

A: The EPYC 7763 wins three tests: PassMark data encryption (30.9% ahead), PassMark integer math (21.6% ahead), and PassMark random string sorting (10.2% ahead).

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures and manufacturing processes. The Intel Xeon 678X uses the Granite Rapids architecture, manufactured on Intel’s 5 nm process, while the AMD EPYC 7763 uses the Zen 3 architecture, manufactured on TSMC’s 7 nm process. This generational gap is reflected in the transistor counts, with the EPYC 7763 containing 33,200 million transistors spread across 8 dies of 81 mm² each. The Xeon 678X uses a dual-die design with a combined die size of 2x 598 mm². The Xeon 678X is built on the newer Granite Rapids-WS generation, while the EPYC is from the Zen 3 (Milan) generation.

The cache hierarchies are notably different. The Xeon 678X features a per-core L1 cache of 112 KB and a per-core L2 cache of 2 MB, with a shared 192 MB L3 cache. The EPYC 7763 has a smaller per-core L1 cache of 64 KB and a per-core L2 cache of 512 KB, but compensates with a larger shared L3 cache of 256 MB. This larger L3 cache on the AMD chip is a key architectural difference, potentially benefiting workloads that rely on large working sets. The Xeon 678X also has a higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz versus 3.50 GHz on the EPYC, and a higher base clock of 2.40 GHz versus 2.45 GHz on the AMD part. The Xeon 678X is the only one of the two with an unlocked multiplier.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. The Intel part uses DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 409.6 GB/s, double the 204.8 GB/s bandwidth of the DDR4-based EPYC 7763. Both support ECC memory and use an eight-channel memory bus. PCIe support also differs: the Xeon 678X provides Gen 5 with 128 lanes, while the EPYC 7763 provides Gen 4 with the same 128 lanes. The Xeon 678X has no integrated graphics, and the EPYC 7763 also lists no integrated graphics.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the Intel Xeon 678X and AMD EPYC 7763:

• Cores: Intel 48 vs AMD 64
• Threads: Intel 96 vs AMD 128
• Base Clock: Intel 2.40 GHz vs AMD 2.45 GHz
• Boost Clock: Intel 4.90 GHz vs AMD 3.50 GHz
• TDP: Intel 300 W vs AMD 280 W
• Socket: Intel Socket 4710 vs AMD Socket SP3
• Architecture: Granite Rapids vs Zen 3
• Process Node: 5 nm vs 7 nm
• Die Size: 2x 598 mm² vs 8x 81 mm²
• L1 Cache: 112 KB (per core) vs 64 KB (per core)
• L2 Cache: 2 MB (per core) vs 512 KB (per core)
• L3 Cache: 192 MB (shared) vs 256 MB (shared)
• Memory Support: DDR5 vs DDR4
• Memory Bandwidth: 409.6 GB/s vs 204.8 GB/s
• PCIe: Gen 5, 128 Lanes vs Gen 4, 128 Lanes
• Release Date: 2026-02-01 vs 2021-03-14
• Launch MSRP: $3749 vs $7890
• Multiplier Unlocked: Yes vs No

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Xeon 678X dominates the Cinebench suite, winning all three multi-core and single-core tests by a consistent 16.5% margin. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Xeon scores 83,775 against the EPYC’s 71,902. The R20 multi-core test shows a similar pattern: 35,185 for Intel versus 30,198 for AMD. The single-core results in Cinebench R15 are 1,192 for Intel and 1,023 for AMD, again a 16.5% delta. This consistency suggests a fundamental per-clock performance advantage for the Xeon 678X, which uses its 4.90 GHz boost clock to overcome the EPYC’s core advantage.

The PassMark suite reveals where each processor excels. The most significant Intel win is in the find prime numbers test, where the Xeon 678X scores 1,010 versus 668 for the EPYC, a 51.2% margin. This is closely followed by the single-thread test, where Intel leads by 49.2% (3,758 vs 2,518). The extended instructions test shows a 43.9% Intel advantage (141,431 vs 98,294), and floating-point math is 25.8% in Intel’s favor (362,070 vs 287,919). The data compression test is closer, with Intel winning by 3.8% (1,690,896 vs 1,628,973). The multithread PassMark test also goes to Intel by 16.5% (98,559 vs 84,591), and physics by a narrow 1.3% (7,809 vs 7,708).

The AMD EPYC 7763’s victories are concentrated in three specific areas. The largest is data encryption, where it scores 121,001 against Intel’s 83,598, a 30.9% advantage. This is a notable reversal given the Intel part’s overall superiority. The EPYC also wins integer math by 21.6% (516,920 vs 405,075) and random string sorting by 10.2% (182,676 vs 164,102). These wins suggest that the EPYC 7763’s 64-core design and larger 256 MB L3 cache provide a tangible benefit in workloads that are heavily parallelized and not dependent on high clock speeds or memory bandwidth. The data suggests that for these specific tasks, the older AMD architecture remains competitive, but the overall benchmark picture is overwhelmingly in favor of the Intel Xeon 678X.