AMD EPYC 8224P vs Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 Comparison

The AMD EPYC 8224P and Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 are both server/workstation processors, but they come from different eras and design philosophies. The EPYC 8224P is built on AMD's Zen 4c architecture and targets modern data center workloads, while the Xeon Platinum 8270 is a Cascade Lake part from Intel. In the database's head-to-head benchmark suite, the AMD chip wins 15 of 17 tests, with the Intel chip taking only two. The EPYC 8224P also holds a 95th percentile ranking among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 75,582, while the Xeon Platinum 8270 sits at the 94th percentile with an average score of 71,370. These numbers set the stage for a detailed comparison. The EPYC's average score is within 0.1% of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 and 0.2% of the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D, while the Xeon's average is 0.4% above the Intel Xeon 6511P and 0.6% below the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is in data encryption, where the EPYC 8224P scores 46,742 against the Xeon's 8,798, a delta of 431.3% in AMD's favor. This is the largest single gap in the entire test set. Physics simulation shows a similar pattern: AMD scores 3,236 versus Intel's 903, a 258.4% advantage. Prime number finding also heavily favors AMD, with 206 versus 84, a 145.2% lead. These three tests highlight the EPYC's strength in compute-intensive, parallel workloads.

In multithreaded performance, the EPYC 8224P posts 45,421 in Passmark's multithread test, while the Xeon manages 29,986, a 51.5% difference. The Cinebench suite is consistent: across R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core, AMD leads by exactly 35.2% in every case. For example, Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 38,607 for AMD versus 28,561 for Intel, and single-core shows 5,450 versus 4,032. Integer math also goes to AMD, 185,556 versus 160,322, a 15.7% margin. Floating point math is closer, with AMD at 104,698 and Intel at 99,432, a 5.3% edge. Random string sorting is nearly tied, 81,674 versus 80,208, a 1.8% difference. Even single-thread Passmark shows AMD ahead, 2,339 versus 2,325, a 0.6% margin.

The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 takes two wins. In data compression, it scores 728,144 against AMD's 702,065, a 3.6% advantage. In extended instructions, Intel leads with 51,191 versus 43,614, a 14.8% gap. These are the only tests where the older Intel part comes out on top.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has better single-thread performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 8224P wins every single-thread test. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 5,450 versus Intel's 4,032, a 35.2% lead. In Passmark single-thread, AMD scores 2,339 versus 2,325, a 0.6% edge.

Q: Which CPU has better multi-thread performance?

A: AMD dominates multi-thread workloads. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 38,607 for AMD versus 28,561 for Intel, a 35.2% difference. Passmark multithread gives AMD 45,421 versus Intel's 29,986, a 51.5% advantage.

Q: Which CPU has more cores?

A: The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 has 26 cores and 52 threads, while the AMD EPYC 8224P has 24 cores and 48 threads. Despite having fewer cores, AMD still wins all multi-thread benchmarks.

Q: Which CPU supports faster memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 8224P supports DDR5 memory with a six-channel bus and 230.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 supports DDR4, and the database lists no memory bus or bandwidth figures for it.

Q: Which CPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 boosts to 4.00 GHz, while the AMD EPYC 8224P boosts to 3.00 GHz. However, AMD still wins all single-thread tests, indicating that clock speed alone does not determine performance.

Q: Which CPU has lower power consumption?

A: The AMD EPYC 8224P has a TDP of 160W, while the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 has a TDP of 205W. The AMD part draws less power under load.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 8224P is the stronger processor in nearly every measured category. It wins 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, including all Cinebench variants, all Passmark math and physics tests, and the encryption and prime number workloads. Its average benchmark score of 75,582 places it in the 95th percentile, while the Xeon's 71,370 sits in the 94th. The only areas where the Intel part leads are data compression and extended instructions, with margins of 3.6% and 14.8% respectively. For general server and workstation use, the EPYC 8224P is the clear choice. The Xeon Platinum 8270 should only be considered if the workload is specifically dominated by data compression or extended instruction set usage, where its advantages are real but narrow.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in many core specifications. The AMD EPYC 8224P has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 has 26 cores and 52 threads. Base clocks are 2.55 GHz for AMD and 2.70 GHz for Intel, but boost clocks are 3.00 GHz and 4.00 GHz respectively. TDP is 160W for AMD and 205W for Intel. The AMD part uses the AMD Socket SP6, while Intel uses Socket 3647. The EPYC 8224P is built on a 5 nm process from TSMC, while the Xeon uses Intel's 14 nm process. Transistor counts are 17,750 million for AMD versus 8,000 million for Intel. The AMD die size is listed as 2x 73 mm², while Intel's is not recorded. L3 cache is 64 MB shared on AMD versus 35.75 MB shared on Intel. Memory support differs: AMD uses DDR5 with a six-channel bus and 230.4 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel uses DDR4 with no bus or bandwidth data. AMD also lists PCIe Gen 5 with 96 lanes, while Intel has no PCIe information. The release dates are September 2023 for AMD and December 2018 for Intel. The AMD part has a launch MSRP of $855, while Intel's is not listed. The part numbers are also different.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is substantial. The AMD EPYC 8224P uses the Zen 4c architecture, codenamed Siena, and is part of the EPYC 8004 series. It is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 17,750 million transistors across two 73 mm² dies. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 uses the Cascade Lake architecture, codenamed Cascade Lake-SP, on Intel's 14 nm process with 8,000 million transistors. The L3 cache is 64 MB on AMD versus 35.75 MB on Intel. AMD supports DDR5 memory with a six-channel interface and 230.4 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel supports DDR4 with no listed bandwidth. AMD also provides PCIe Gen 5 with 96 lanes, a feature absent from Intel's specification sheet. These architectural differences explain the performance gaps: the newer 5 nm process, larger cache, and faster memory interface give AMD a decisive edge in most workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 8224P wins in all compute-heavy and parallel tasks. It leads in data encryption by 431.3%, physics by 258.4%, prime number finding by 145.2%, and multithreaded performance by 51.5%. It also wins all Cinebench tests, integer math, floating point math, random string sorting, and single-thread tests. This makes it the better choice for rendering, scientific simulation, encryption, and any workload that scales across many threads. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 wins only in data compression, with a 3.6% lead, and in extended instructions, with a 14.8% lead. These results suggest that Intel retains an edge in compression algorithms and workloads that heavily use extended instruction sets, such as certain media processing or specialized math libraries. For everything else, the EPYC 8224P is the superior part.