AMD EPYC 7D12 vs Intel Xeon Gold 6338N Comparison

# The Verdict

The benchmark data presents an unusually consistent picture: the AMD EPYC 7D12 wins every single head-to-head comparison against the Intel Xeon Gold 6338N, yet the margins are remarkably narrow. Across six Cinebench tests, the AMD part leads by either 1.8% or 1.9% in every discipline. The EPYC 7D12's average benchmark score of 10547 sits 1.9% above the Xeon Gold 6338N's 10347, placing both processors at the 66th percentile among all CPUs.

For workloads dominated by multi-threaded rendering, the EPYC 7D12 delivers a 36465 score in Cinebench R23 multi-core, compared to 35773 for the Intel part. That 692-point gap translates to a 1.9% advantage. Single-threaded performance tells the same story: 5148 versus 5050 in R23 single-core, again a 1.9% edge for AMD. The consistency of these deltas across every test—from R15 to R23, single-core to multi-core—suggests the EPYC 7D12 holds a small but systematic performance lead.

The choice between these two processors should hinge on platform requirements rather than raw benchmark scores. The EPYC 7D12 operates on AMD Socket SP3 with a 85 W TDP, while the Xeon Gold 6338N uses Intel Socket 4189 and draws 185 W. The AMD part offers 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only) versus 64 on the Intel side, and memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s against 170.7 GB/s. However, the Intel chip boosts to 3.50 GHz from a 2.20 GHz base, while the AMD part boosts to 3.00 GHz from just 1.10 GHz. The Xeon Gold 6338N also provides 48 MB of shared L3 cache, whereas the EPYC 7D12 distributes 32 MB per die across a 128 MB total L3 pool.

Neither processor has a launch MSRP listed in the data. Both remain in active production. The EPYC 7D12 released on 2020-04-13, while the Xeon Gold 6338N followed on 2021-04-05. For buyers prioritizing maximum PCIe lane count and higher memory bandwidth, the AMD part is the clear choice. For those needing the higher boost clock and larger shared L3 cache per socket, the Intel part may be preferable despite its performance deficit.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD EPYC 7D12 uses the Zen 2 architecture on a 7 nm process from TSMC, built on the Rome codename. It packs 15,200 million transistors across a die size of 4x 74 mm². The Intel Xeon Gold 6338N employs the Ice Lake architecture on Intel's 10 nm process, with the Ice Lake-SP codename. The data does not list transistor count or die size for the Intel part.

Cache hierarchies diverge significantly. Both parts share the same 64 KB L1 cache per core. However, the EPYC 7D12 carries 512 KB L2 per core, while the Xeon Gold 6338N doubles this to 1 MB per core. At the L3 level, the AMD part uses a chiplet design with 32 MB per die, aggregating to 128 MB total. The Intel part instead uses a monolithic 48 MB shared L3 pool. This structural difference reflects AMD's multi-die approach versus Intel's single-die implementation.

Memory support is identical in type (DDR4) and channel count (eight-channel), but bandwidth differs: 204.8 GB/s for AMD versus 170.7 GB/s for Intel. Both support ECC memory. PCIe capabilities also diverge, with the EPYC 7D12 providing 128 Gen 4 lanes (CPU only) compared to 64 for the Xeon Gold 6338N. Neither processor includes integrated graphics.

Clock behavior shows a stark contrast. The EPYC 7D12 runs at a 1.10 GHz base clock, boosting to 3.00 GHz. The Xeon Gold 6338N starts at 2.20 GHz base and reaches 3.50 GHz boost. This 500 MHz boost advantage for Intel does not translate into benchmark wins, indicating that AMD's architecture achieves competitive performance at lower clock speeds. The TDP figures reinforce this: 85 W for AMD versus 185 W for Intel, a 100 W difference that could impact system cooling and power delivery requirements.

The release cadence also differs, with AMD launching on 2020-04-13 and Intel on 2021-04-05. Both processors target the server/workstation segment and remain in active production. Neither offers an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD EPYC 7D12 scores 10547 on average, which is 1.9% higher than the Intel Xeon Gold 6338N's 10347. Both CPUs sit at the 66th percentile among all processors.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in multi-core rendering performance?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 7D12 scores 36465 versus 35773 for the Xeon Gold 6338N, a 1.9% difference. The R20 multi-core results show 15315 versus 15024, and R15 multi-core shows 3675 versus 3605, each with the same 1.9% margin.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the Intel processor wins?

A: No. Across all six head-to-head tests—Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core variants—the AMD EPYC 7D12 wins every comparison. The Intel Xeon Gold 6338N records zero wins.

Q: What are the clock speed differences between these processors?

A: The EPYC 7D12 has a 1.10 GHz base clock and 3.00 GHz boost clock. The Xeon Gold 6338N has a 2.20 GHz base clock and 3.50 GHz boost clock. Intel's clocks are higher in both categories, yet AMD still wins all benchmarks.

Q: How do the cache configurations differ?

A: Both have 64 KB L1 per core and support DDR4 memory. The EPYC 7D12 uses 512 KB L2 per core with 32 MB L3 per die, totaling 128 MB. The Xeon Gold 6338N uses 1 MB L2 per core with 48 MB shared L3. The AMD part has substantially more total L3 cache.

Q: Which processor offers more PCIe lanes?

A: The AMD EPYC 7D12 provides 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only), double the 64 lanes available on the Intel Xeon Gold 6338N. Memory bandwidth also favors AMD: 204.8 GB/s compared to 170.7 GB/s.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 7D12 | Intel Xeon Gold 6338N |

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

| Base Clock | 1.10 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.00 GHz | 3.50 GHz |

| TDP | 85 W | 185 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | Intel Socket 4189 |

| Architecture | Zen 2 | Ice Lake |

| Codename | Rome | Ice Lake-SP |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 15,200 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 4x 74 mm² | Not listed |

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

| L3 Cache | 32 MB (per die) | 48 MB (shared) |

| Total L3 | 128 MB | Not listed |

| Memory Bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | 170.7 GB/s |

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

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

Both processors share identical core counts (32 cores, 64 threads), L1 cache (64 KB per core), memory type (DDR4), memory bus (eight-channel), ECC support (true), market segment (Server/Workstation), production status (Active), and integrated graphics (none). Neither has a launch MSRP listed, and both have locked multipliers.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The complete benchmark sweep favors the AMD EPYC 7D12 by a consistent margin. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 7D12 scores 36465 against 35773 for the Xeon Gold 6338N, delivering a 1.9% advantage. This pattern repeats in R23 single-core: 5148 versus 5050, also 1.9%. The R20 tests show the same delta—15315 versus 15024 in multi-core and 2162 versus 2121 in single-core, each a 1.9% win for AMD. The R15 results continue the trend: 3675 versus 3605 in multi-core (1.9%) and 518 versus 509 in single-core (1.8%).

The largest relative win for AMD comes in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the 1.8% delta is the narrowest of the set. Every other test shows exactly 1.9% separation. This uniformity suggests the performance difference stems from architectural efficiency rather than any single workload characteristic. The EPYC 7D12 achieves these results despite a 1.10 GHz base clock and 3.00 GHz boost, both substantially lower than Intel's 2.20 GHz base and 3.50 GHz boost.

Examining the nearest rivals provides context. The EPYC 7D12's average score of 10547 sits 0.1% below the Intel Core i7-4790 (10556) and 0.3% above the AMD EPYC 7502P (10512). It leads the Intel Xeon W-3175X (10369) by 1.7% and the Xeon Gold 6338N (10347) by 1.9%. The Xeon Gold 6338N, meanwhile, trails the Xeon W-3175X by 0.2%, leads the Intel Xeon E3-1565L v5 (10320) by 0.3%, the Intel Xeon Gold 6312U (10291) by 0.5%, and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8280 (10230) by 1.1%.

In the direct head-to-head, the AMD EPYC 7D12 wins all six tests, with the Xeon Gold 6338N recording zero victories. The performance gap is real but modest—any workload that is sensitive to the 1.9% difference will favor AMD, while workloads tolerant of small deltas could use either processor interchangeably. The data shows the EPYC 7D12 as the faster part, but the Xeon Gold 6338N's higher boost clock and larger per-core L2 cache may offer advantages in scenarios not captured by these Cinebench tests.