AMD EPYC 7763 vs Intel Xeon w9-3575X Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7763 and Intel Xeon w9-3575X occupy different corners of the workstation and server market, and the benchmark data draws a clear line between them. The EPYC 7763 wins 12 of the 16 recorded head-to-head tests, establishing itself as the dominant multi-threaded throughput engine. Its victories are not marginal: in integer math it leads by 73.3%, in data encryption by 94.4%, and in random string sorting by 35.6%. These are workloads that scale with core count and memory bandwidth, and the EPYC 7763's 64 cores and 128 threads simply overwhelm the Xeon's 44 cores and 88 threads.

The Xeon w9-3575X, by contrast, wins exactly four tests, and every one of them is a single-threaded or lightly threaded discipline. Its PassMark single-thread score of 3672 versus 2518 for the EPYC represents a 31.4% advantage, and it also takes extended instructions (109843 versus 98294, a 10.5% lead) and prime number finding (687 versus 668, a 2.8% edge). The Xeon's higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz against the EPYC's 3.50 GHz explains this pattern, as does its larger per-core L2 cache of 2 MB versus 512 KB.

The use-case split is straightforward. For workloads that hammer all cores simultaneously, such as video rendering, scientific simulation, or database processing, the EPYC 7763 is the clear winner. For applications that depend on a single thread's speed, or that use instruction sets that benefit from newer microarchitecture, the Xeon w9-3575X holds the advantage. The data shows that no single processor dominates everything, but the EPYC 7763's breadth of wins makes it the more versatile choice for most server workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7763 has 64 cores and 128 threads, while the Intel Xeon w9-3575X has 44 cores and 88 threads. This 20-core gap is the primary reason the EPYC leads in most multi-threaded benchmarks.

Q: How large is the single-threaded performance gap?

A: The Xeon w9-3575X scores 3672 in PassMark single-thread versus 2518 for the EPYC 7763, a 31.4% advantage. This is the largest single benchmark delta in either direction across all 16 tests.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Xeon w9-3575X supports DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 307.2 GB/s, while the AMD EPYC 7763 uses DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s. Both have eight-channel memory buses.

Q: What is the difference in PCIe support?

A: The EPYC 7763 offers 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only), while the Xeon w9-3575X provides 112 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only). The Xeon has newer PCIe generation but fewer total lanes.

Q: Which processor is more efficient per watt?

A: The EPYC 7763 has a TDP of 280 watts, while the Xeon w9-3575X has a TDP of 340 watts. Despite the lower power draw, the EPYC still wins most performance tests, indicating better performance per watt in multi-threaded workloads.

Q: Are both processors currently in production?

A: Yes, both the AMD EPYC 7763 and the Intel Xeon w9-3575X have active production status according to the database records.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD EPYC 7763 is built on the Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Milan, using a 7 nm process from TSMC. It consists of 8 dies, each measuring 81 mm², with a combined transistor count of 33,200 million. The Intel Xeon w9-3575X uses the Sapphire Rapids architecture on Intel's 10 nm process, with 4 dies each measuring 477 mm². The foundry difference is significant: TSMC's 7 nm node is denser, allowing AMD to pack more transistors into a smaller total die area.

Cache hierarchies diverge sharply. The EPYC 7763 allocates 64 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, but its main asset is a shared 256 MB L3 cache, an enormous pool that benefits heavily threaded workloads with shared data. The Xeon w9-3575X provides 80 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2 per core, which is four times the L2 per core, but its total L3 is only 97.5 MB. The Xeon's larger per-core L2 helps single-threaded performance, while the EPYC's massive L3 helps in multi-threaded scenarios.

Memory architecture also differs. The EPYC 7763 supports DDR4 with a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, while the Xeon w9-3575X supports DDR5 with 307.2 GB/s, a 50% improvement in theoretical bandwidth. Both use eight-channel memory buses and support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity shows the generational gap: the EPYC offers 128 Gen 4 lanes, the Xeon offers 112 Gen 5 lanes. The Xeon's PCIe Gen 5 doubles per-lane bandwidth, but the EPYC has more total lanes.

Other notable differences: the Xeon w9-3575X has an unlocked multiplier (it is overclockable), while the EPYC 7763 is locked. The Xeon has no integrated graphics (listed as N/A), and the EPYC also lacks integrated graphics. The release dates are 2021-03-14 for the EPYC and 2024-08-23 for the Xeon, making the Intel part a much newer design.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is PassMark data encryption, where the EPYC 7763 scores 121001 against the Xeon's 62258, a 94.4% advantage. This near-doubling reflects the EPYC's 64 cores executing cryptographic operations in parallel, a workload that does not benefit from the Xeon's higher clocks. Similarly, integer math shows a 73.3% lead for the EPYC (516920 versus 298224), and random string sorting a 35.6% lead (182676 versus 134723). Data compression also favors the EPYC by 33.6% (1628973 versus 1219584), which indicates strong memory subsystem performance for the AMD part.

The Cinebench results are much closer. In R15 multi-core, the EPYC scores 7247 against 7140 for the Xeon, a 1.5% margin. In R20 multi-core, the EPYC leads 30198 to 29751, again by 1.5%. In R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 71902 versus 70837, once more a 1.5% difference. The single-core Cinebench results are also nearly identical: R15 single-core gives 1023 for the EPYC and 1008 for the Xeon, a 1.5% EPYC win; R20 single-core gives 4263 versus 4200, also 1.5%; but R23 single-core was not recorded for the Xeon in this data set. The consistency of the 1.5% delta across all Cinebench tests suggests the EPYC has a slight architectural edge in this rendering workload, even at single-threaded levels.

PassMark multithread shows the EPYC at 84591 versus 83338 for the Xeon, a 1.5% lead. Floating point math favors the EPYC by 5.3% (287919 versus 273398), and physics by 12.8% (7708 versus 6836). The Xeon's wins are concentrated: PassMark single-thread (3672 versus 2518, a 31.4% lead), extended instructions (109843 versus 98294, a 10.5% lead), and prime number finding (687 versus 668, a 2.8% lead). The extended instructions result is particularly telling: it reflects the Xeon's newer AVX-512 support from Sapphire Rapids, which the Zen 3 architecture lacks.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 7763 | Intel Xeon w9-3575X |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 64 | 44 |

| Threads | 128 | 88 |

| Base Clock | 2.45 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.50 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 280 W | 340 W |

| Process Node | 7 nm (TSMC) | 10 nm (Intel) |

| L1 Cache (per core) | 64 KB | 80 KB |

| L2 Cache (per core) | 512 KB | 2 MB |

| L3 Cache | 256 MB (shared) | 97.5 MB |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | 307.2 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 128 lanes | Gen 5, 112 lanes |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | Intel Socket 4677 |

| Release Date | 2021-03-14 | 2024-08-23 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | 100-000000312WOF | SRN72 |

The EPYC 7763 has more cores, more threads, a larger L3 cache, and lower TDP. The Xeon w9-3575X has higher clocks, larger per-core caches, newer memory and PCIe standards, and an unlocked multiplier. The launch MSRP for the EPYC 7763 is $7890, while the Xeon w9-3575X has a launch MSRP of $3789.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear recommendation based on workload type. For multi-threaded server and workstation tasks, the AMD EPYC 7763 is the superior processor. It leads in 12 of 16 benchmarks, with particularly large margins in encryption, integer math, and data compression. Its 64 cores and 256 MB L3 cache make it exceptionally strong for virtualization, database workloads, and any application that can use more than 44 threads. The 1.5% Cinebench multi-core advantage, while small, is consistent across all three versions of the test, suggesting a robust architectural edge.

For single-threaded and instruction-set sensitive workloads, the Intel Xeon w9-3575X is the better choice. Its 31.4% PassMark single-thread lead and 10.5% extended instructions advantage make it suitable for applications that rely on high per-core clocks or AVX-512 capabilities. The Xeon also has the advantage of being a newer design, with DDR5 support and PCIe Gen 5, which may matter for future-proofing a system.

The average benchmark scores tell a broader story: the EPYC 7763 averages 179916 points across all recorded tests, while the Xeon averages 144323, a difference of 24.6%. The EPYC's percentile rank of 98 matches the Xeon's, but the EPYC sits in a higher performance tier overall. Its nearest rivals include the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX (within 1.5%) and the EPYC 8534P (within 2.8%), while the Xeon's closest competitors are the EPYC 7643P (within 0.3%) and the Ryzen 9 PRO 9965X3D (within 0.4%). This places the EPYC 7763 in the company of the fastest processors available, while the Xeon w9-3575X competes with a lower performance bracket.

Ultimately, the EPYC 7763 is the pick for anyone running heavily threaded workloads that can saturate 64 cores. The Xeon w9-3575X is the pick for users whose software is single-thread bound or requires the latest instruction sets. The data does not support a universal winner, but it does support the EPYC 7763 as the more broadly dominant processor in this comparison.