AMD EPYC 7D12 vs Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y wins every single recorded Cinebench test against the AMD EPYC 7D12. Across six head-to-head comparisons, the Intel part takes a clean sweep, with all margins falling in a narrow band between 6.1% and 6.2%. This consistency suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-dependent, a pattern that holds in both multi-core and single-core tests.

Starting with multi-core results, the Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y scores 3,899 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, beating the EPYC 7D12's 3,675 by 6.1%. The same relative advantage appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where Intel posts 16,249 against AMD's 15,315, again a 6.1% gap. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel part reaches 38,689 while the EPYC 7D12 manages 36,465, and the delta remains at 6.1%. The consistency of these margins is striking: whether the workload scales to 24 cores or 32 cores, the percentage difference does not move.

Single-core results tell the same story with a slightly larger lead in one instance. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y scores 550 against 518 for the EPYC 7D12, a 6.2% advantage. Cinebench R20 single-core shows Intel at 2,294 versus AMD's 2,162, a 6.1% gap. In R23 single-core, Intel records 5,462 and AMD records 5,148, again 6.1% apart. The single-core margins mirror the multi-core results almost exactly, which indicates that the Intel advantage is not tied to core count or thread scheduling, but to per-thread performance.

The average benchmark scores in the database reinforce this hierarchy. The Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y holds an average benchmark score of 11,191, while the EPYC 7D12 sits at 10,547. That difference of roughly 6% aligns with the head-to-head deltas. Both processors land in the 66th percentile among all CPUs in the database, so they occupy the same performance tier overall, but within that tier the Intel chip consistently finishes ahead in every measured workload.

The nearest rivals for each processor provide additional context. The Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y's closest competitors by average score are the Intel Core i3-1305U at 11,200, the AMD Ryzen 5 3500U at 11,176, the AMD EPYC 7542 at 11,152, and the AMD EPYC 9224 at 11,118. All of these sit within 0.7% of the Intel part's average score. The EPYC 7D12's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-4790 at 10,556, the AMD EPYC 7502P at 10,512, the Intel Xeon W-3175X at 10,369, and the Intel Xeon Gold 6338N at 10,347. The closest rival to the EPYC 7D12 is 0.1% behind, while the furthest is 1.9% ahead, meaning the AMD part is bracketed by Intel server and consumer chips in the database's scoring.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y wins in every benchmark category recorded, but the nature of those wins matters for deployment decisions. In multi-core workloads, the Intel part leads by 6.1% consistently across R15, R20, and R23. That means for rendering, scientific computing, or any heavily threaded application that resembles Cinebench's workload, the Intel chip delivers a measurable, repeatable edge. The lead is modest but uniform, so users can expect the same relative advantage regardless of which Cinebench version or workload intensity they use.

Single-core performance also favors Intel, with the same 6.1% to 6.2% margin. This matters for applications that rely on per-thread responsiveness, database transactions, legacy software with limited threading, or any workload where a single core is the bottleneck. The Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y's boost clock of 3.60 GHz supports this result, though the database does not attribute the win to clock speed directly. The EPYC 7D12, with a boost clock of 3.00 GHz, trails in every single-threaded measurement.

The EPYC 7D12 does not win any of the six recorded comparisons. Its strengths lie elsewhere in the specification sheet, not in the Cinebench results. It offers more cores, 32 versus 24, and more threads, 64 versus 48, yet it still loses multi-core tests. This is a notable outcome: the AMD part has a 33% core advantage and a 33% thread advantage, but the Intel part's higher per-core throughput overcomes that deficit in all three multi-core Cinebench tests. The database does not record a single workload where the EPYC 7D12's additional cores translate into a benchmark win.

For use-case planning, the data suggests the Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y is the stronger choice for Cinebench-style rendering and general compute. The EPYC 7D12's value proposition, if any, would have to come from workloads not represented in these six benchmarks, or from platform-level considerations such as PCIe lane count or power envelope, which are separate from measured performance.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies and different process generations. The Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y uses the Ice Lake-SP architecture, built on Intel's 10 nm process node and fabricated in-house. The AMD EPYC 7D12 uses the Zen 2 Rome architecture, built on TSMC's 7 nm process node. That process difference is significant for power efficiency and transistor density: the EPYC 7D12 packs 15,200 million transistors across four 74 mm² dies, while the Intel part's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

Core and thread configurations differ substantially. The Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the EPYC 7D12 has 32 cores and 64 threads. The AMD part offers more parallel hardware, but the Intel part runs at a higher base clock of 2.40 GHz versus the EPYC 7D12's 1,100.00 MHz base clock, and a higher boost clock of 3.60 GHz versus 3.00 GHz. The base clock disparity is enormous on paper, but the benchmark results show that the Intel part's clock advantage more than compensates for the AMD part's core advantage in Cinebench.

Cache hierarchies also differ. Both processors have 64 KB of L1 cache per core. The Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y has 1 MB of L2 cache per core and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC 7D12 has 512 KB of L2 per core, half the Intel amount, and 32 MB of L3 per die, with a total L3 of 128 MB across the chip. The AMD part's total L3 cache is significantly larger, but the Intel part's larger per-core L2 may contribute to its per-thread performance advantage.

Memory support is similar on paper: both support DDR4, both use an eight-channel memory bus, and both have a memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity differs, with the Intel part offering Gen 4 with 64 lanes (CPU only) and the AMD part offering Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only). The EPYC 7D12 provides double the PCIe lanes, which matters for systems with many expansion cards, GPUs, or NVMe drives.

The EPYC 7D12 uses the AMD Socket SP3, while the Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y uses Intel Socket 4189. These are not interchangeable platforms. Power ratings differ as well: the Intel part has a TDP of 185, and the AMD part has a TDP of 85. The EPYC 7D12 draws far less power on paper, which could influence cooling and operating costs, though the database does not provide efficiency metrics.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded benchmark data, the Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y is the faster processor in every test measured. It wins all six Cinebench comparisons, with deltas between 6.1% and 6.2% across single-core and multi-core workloads. Its average benchmark score of 11,191 exceeds the EPYC 7D12's 10,547, and both sit in the same 66th percentile, meaning they compete in the same performance class, with Intel holding the edge within that class.

Users who prioritize maximum Cinebench rendering performance should choose the Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y. The data shows a uniform advantage in both single-threaded and multi-threaded tests, with no recorded workload where the EPYC 7D12 pulls ahead. The Intel part achieves this despite having fewer cores and threads, which points to stronger per-core execution and higher clock speeds.

Users who need more PCIe lanes or lower power draw may find the EPYC 7D12 attractive for platform-level reasons. The AMD part offers 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes versus Intel's 64, and its TDP of 85 is dramatically lower than Intel's 185. These are not benchmark performance metrics, but they are recorded specifications that could influence a purchasing decision. The EPYC 7D12 also has a larger total L3 cache at 128 MB, though this does not translate into a Cinebench win.

The verdict from the measurements is clear: for raw compute performance as captured by Cinebench, the Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y is the superior part. The EPYC 7D12's advantages are confined to specifications outside the benchmark suite, such as core count, cache size, PCIe capacity, and power efficiency. Neither processor appears to have a launch MSRP recorded in the database, so no cost comparison is possible from the available data.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core Cinebench tests?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y wins all three multi-core tests. It scores 3,899 in R15, 16,249 in R20, and 38,689 in R23, compared to the EPYC 7D12's 3,675, 15,315, and 36,465 respectively. Each win is by 6.1%.

Q: Does the EPYC 7D12 win any benchmark in the database?

A: No. The EPYC 7D12 loses all six head-to-head comparisons. The Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y wins every single-core and multi-core test recorded.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The EPYC 7D12 has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y has 24 cores and 48 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the Intel part wins all multi-core benchmarks.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each processor?

A: Both processors have identical memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. Both support DDR4 memory with an eight-channel bus and ECC support.

Q: How does the PCIe connectivity differ?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y offers Gen 4 with 64 lanes (CPU only), while the EPYC 7D12 offers Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only). The AMD part has twice the PCIe lane count.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y has an average benchmark score of 11,191, and the EPYC 7D12 has an average score of 10,547. Both processors sit in the 66th percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y | AMD EPYC 7D12 |

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

| Cores | 24 | 32 |

| Threads | 48 | 64 |

| Base Clock | 2.40 GHz | 1100.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.60 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| TDP | 185 | 85 |

| Socket | Intel Socket 4189 | AMD Socket SP3 |

| Architecture | Ice Lake | Zen 2 |

| Codename | Ice Lake-SP | Rome |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 7 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 15,200 million |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 4x 74 mm² |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 36 MB (shared) | 32 MB (per die) |

| Total L3 Cache | Not recorded | 128 MB |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 64 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 128 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Release Date | 2021-04-05 | 2020-04-13 |

| Part Number | Not recorded | 100-000000044 |