AMD EPYC 7F72 vs Intel Xeon w5-2565X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison between the AMD EPYC 7F72 and the Intel Xeon w5-2565X shows two processors with very different strengths. The AMD part wins 12 of the 17 recorded comparisons, while the Intel part takes 5. The most striking result is in PassMark physics, where the EPYC 7F72 leads by 146.3%, scoring 6459 against 2622. This is the largest single delta in the entire benchmark set and points to a decisive advantage in workloads that depend on physical simulation or rigid-body dynamics.

The EPYC 7F72 also dominates in PassMark data encryption, posting 56261 versus 36365, a 54.7% advantage. Random string sorting goes to the AMD chip by 37.8%, with scores of 102436 and 74360. Prime number finding is another large win for AMD: 498 versus 218, which is a 128.4% difference. Data compression shows an 11.4% lead for the EPYC 7F72, scoring 808795 against 726133.

The Cinebench results are all close, but they consistently favor the AMD processor. Across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core variants show the EPYC 7F72 ahead by exactly 1.6%. For example, Cinebench R23 multi-core gives 44829 for AMD versus 44112 for Intel, and single-core gives 6328 versus 6227. The PassMark multithread score also shows a 1.6% edge for AMD, at 52740 versus 51897.

The Intel Xeon w5-2565X has its own clear victories. PassMark single-thread shows a 33.7% advantage for Intel, with 3595 against 2384. Floating point math goes to Intel by 26.6%, scoring 147644 versus 108437. Extended instructions favor Intel by 20.4%, at 58976 versus 46936. Integer math is closer, with Intel ahead by 4.4%, 189446 versus 181103.

Interpreting these numbers, the EPYC 7F72 is the stronger overall performer in the database average, sitting at 85072 compared to 80671 for the Xeon, a difference of roughly 5.5%. The EPYC part also ranks at the 96th percentile among all CPUs, while the Xeon sits at the 95th percentile. The data suggests that for heavily threaded, memory-sensitive, or encryption-heavy tasks, the AMD chip is the safer choice. For single-threaded responsiveness and floating-point throughput, the Intel chip is clearly superior.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies and manufacturing processes. The AMD EPYC 7F72 is built on Zen 2 architecture with the codename Rome, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It contains 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. The Intel Xeon w5-2565X uses Sapphire Rapids, fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel, with no transistor or die size data recorded in the database.

Core counts differ significantly. The EPYC 7F72 has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the Xeon w5-2565X has 18 cores and 36 threads. Both have a base clock of 3.20 GHz, but the boost clocks are very different: the EPYC tops out at 3.70 GHz, while the Xeon boosts to 4.80 GHz. This explains the Intel part's strong single-thread performance.

Cache hierarchies are structured differently. The EPYC 7F72 has 96 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with a massive 192 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon w5-2565X has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and only 37.5 MB of L3. The EPYC's large L3 is a major factor in its data compression and encryption wins.

Memory support also diverges. The EPYC 7F72 uses DDR4 with an eight-channel memory bus and 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Xeon w5-2565X uses DDR5 with a quad-channel bus and 153.6 GB/s. Despite the newer DDR5 standard, the EPYC's wider memory bus delivers higher peak bandwidth. Both support ECC memory.

PCIe capabilities differ as well. The EPYC 7F72 supports PCIe Gen 4, while the Xeon w5-2565X supports PCIe Gen 5 with 64 lanes (CPU only). The Intel part also has an unlocked multiplier, while the EPYC does not. The Xeon is listed as having no integrated graphics, and the EPYC has no integrated graphics entry at all.

The release dates are far apart. The EPYC 7F72 launched on 2020-04-13, while the Xeon w5-2565X launched on 2024-08-23. Both are still marked as Active in production status, and both target the server/workstation market segment.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD EPYC 7F72 has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the Intel Xeon w5-2565X has 18 cores and 36 threads.

Q: Which processor wins in single-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Xeon w5-2565X wins PassMark single-thread by 33.7%, scoring 3595 versus 2384 for the EPYC 7F72. However, in Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC leads by 1.6%, with 6328 versus 6227.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare?

A: The EPYC 7F72 has an eight-channel DDR4 memory bus with 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Xeon w5-2565X has a quad-channel DDR5 bus with 153.6 GB/s. The EPYC has higher peak bandwidth.

Q: What is the difference in L3 cache size?

A: The EPYC 7F72 has 192 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Xeon w5-2565X has 37.5 MB of L3. The EPYC has more than five times the L3 capacity.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Xeon w5-2565X boosts to 4.80 GHz, while the EPYC 7F72 boosts to 3.70 GHz. Both have a base clock of 3.20 GHz.

Q: Which processor ranks higher in the database percentile?

A: The EPYC 7F72 ranks at the 96th percentile among all CPUs, while the Xeon w5-2565X ranks at the 95th percentile. The EPYC also has a higher average benchmark score at 85072 versus 80671.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 7F72 | Intel Xeon w5-2565X |

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

| Cores | 24 | 18 |

| Threads | 48 | 36 |

| Boost clock | 3.70 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| Architecture | Zen 2 | Not listed (Sapphire Rapids codename) |

| Process node | 7 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 3,800 million | Not listed |

| Die size | 74 mm² | Not listed |

| L1 cache | 96 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

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

| L3 cache | 192 MB (shared) | 37.5 MB |

| Memory support | DDR4 | DDR5 |

| Memory bus | Eight-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | 153.6 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4 | Gen 5, 64 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Not listed | N/A |

| Unlocked multiplier | No | Yes |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | Intel Socket 4677 |

| Release date | 2020-04-13 | 2024-08-23 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $1339 |

The two CPUs also share some specifications. Both have a base clock of 3.20 GHz, both have a TDP of 240, both support ECC memory, and both are in the server/workstation market segment.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split depending on workload type. For multi-threaded, cache-heavy, encryption, compression, and physics tasks, the AMD EPYC 7F72 is the stronger processor. It wins 12 of 17 head-to-head comparisons, including the largest margins in the entire set. Its 192 MB of L3 cache and 48 threads give it a structural advantage in data-intensive parallel workloads. The 146.3% lead in PassMark physics and the 54.7% lead in data encryption are not marginal differences; they indicate a fundamental advantage in those specific tasks.

For single-threaded performance and floating-point math, the Intel Xeon w5-2565X is the better choice. The 33.7% lead in PassMark single-thread and the 26.6% lead in floating-point math are substantial. The higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz directly supports this pattern. Users who prioritize responsiveness in lightly threaded applications or heavy numerical floating-point work should prefer the Xeon.

The overall average benchmark score favors the EPYC 7F72, at 85072 versus 80671, and the percentile ranking likewise favors AMD at 96 versus 95. The Xeon does have a newer release date, a higher boost clock, PCIe Gen 5 support, and an unlocked multiplier, which may matter for specific system designs. But strictly from the recorded benchmark data, the EPYC 7F72 is the stronger all-around processor, while the Xeon w5-2565X is the specialist for single-thread and floating-point workloads.