AMD EPYC 8434P vs Intel Xeon 6745P Comparison

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive overall victory for the Intel Xeon 6745P, which wins 13 of the 16 head-to-head comparisons against the AMD EPYC 8434P. The Intel processor’s dominance is most pronounced in single-threaded workloads and physics simulations, while the AMD chip carves out a smaller but meaningful niche in specific data-centric tasks.

Starting with the most lopsided result, the Intel Xeon 6745P scores 681 in PassMark’s find prime numbers test, a staggering 128.5% ahead of the EPYC 8434P’s 298. This margin dwarfs every other difference in the dataset and underscores a fundamental advantage in integer-heavy, latency-sensitive computation. Similarly, the Xeon 6745P leads by 52.2% in PassMark physics (6144 vs 4036) and by 40.9% in PassMark single-thread performance (3450 vs 2448), indicating that its per-core efficiency is substantially higher despite having fewer cores.

The Cinebench results reinforce this pattern with remarkable consistency. Across all five Cinebench tests—R15 multi-core, R15 single-core, R20 multi-core, R20 single-core, and R23 multi-core—the Intel Xeon 6745P holds a virtually identical 26.7% advantage. For instance, in Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Xeon 6745P scores 71578 versus 56516 for the EPYC 8434P. This uniformity suggests a systematic architectural edge rather than workload-specific optimization. The single-core Cinebench deltas (26.6% in R15, 26.7% in R20) align closely with the multi-core margins, confirming that the Intel part’s higher boost clock of 4.30 GHz, compared to 3.10 GHz for the AMD, translates directly into sustained performance gains.

The Intel Xeon 6745P also wins in PassMark extended instructions (108326 vs 86189, a 25.7% gap) and floating-point math (267438 vs 215669, a 24% gap). In multithreaded PassMark, it leads 84210 to 66490, again by 26.7%. Even random string sorting, a memory-latency-sensitive workload, favors Intel, though by a narrower 6% (133528 vs 125932).

The AMD EPYC 8434P’s three wins are concentrated in data processing and cryptography. Its most significant victory comes in PassMark data encryption, where it scores 97254 against 66665 for Intel—a 31.5% advantage. This is the largest delta in AMD’s favor and suggests that the EPYC’s Zen 4c architecture includes hardware acceleration or instruction paths better suited to cryptographic workloads. The AMD part also leads in PassMark integer math (385290 vs 336926, a 12.6% edge) and data compression (1412835 vs 1352801, a 4.2% edge). These wins indicate that for bulk integer operations and compression algorithms, the EPYC 8434P’s higher core count (48 vs 32) and thread count (96 vs 64) can offset its per-core disadvantage.

# Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies within the server CPU space. The Intel Xeon 6745P is built on the Granite Rapids architecture, part of the Xeon 6 generation, and manufactured on Intel’s 5 nm process node. The AMD EPYC 8434P uses the Zen 4c architecture, codenamed Siena, and is fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm node. Both use leading-edge 5 nm manufacturing, but the similarities end there.

Core counts diverge sharply: the Intel part packs 32 cores and 64 threads, while the AMD part offers 48 cores and 96 threads—a 50% advantage in core count for AMD. However, the Intel Xeon 6745P compensates with clock speeds that are substantially higher: its base clock runs at 3.10 GHz versus 2.50 GHz for AMD, and its boost clock reaches 4.30 GHz versus 3.10 GHz. This 1.20 GHz boost differential explains much of the Intel part’s single-thread dominance.

Cache hierarchies reflect different strategies. The Intel Xeon 6745P allocates 112 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and a massive 336 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD EPYC 8434P, in contrast, provides 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 128 MB shared L3. Intel’s L3 cache is 2.6 times larger, which likely contributes to its advantage in workloads with large working sets. The Intel die size is listed as 2x 598 mm², while AMD’s is 4x 73 mm²; AMD also lists 35,500 million transistors, whereas Intel does not provide a transistor count.

Memory architecture also differs significantly. The Intel Xeon 6745P supports eight-channel DDR5 with a peak bandwidth of 409.6 GB/s. The AMD EPYC 8434P uses six-channel DDR5, delivering 230.4 GB/s. This 179.2 GB/s bandwidth advantage for Intel is substantial and likely factors into its wins in memory-sensitive benchmarks like random string sorting and physics. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity is similar in generation—both are Gen 5—but the lane counts differ: Intel provides 88 lanes (CPU only) while AMD provides 96 lanes (CPU only), giving AMD a modest edge in raw I/O expansion.

The sockets are incompatible: Intel uses Socket 4710, while AMD uses Socket SP6. The Intel part has a TDP of 300 watts, while the AMD part draws 200 watts. Neither has integrated graphics nor an unlocked multiplier. The Intel Xeon 6745P launched on 2025-02-23, whereas the AMD EPYC 8434P launched earlier on 2023-09-17.

# FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The Intel Xeon 6745P wins 13 of the 16 head-to-head benchmarks, while the AMD EPYC 8434P wins 3.

Q: How large is the Intel Xeon 6745P’s single-thread advantage?

A: In PassMark single-thread, the Intel Xeon 6745P scores 3450 versus 2448 for the AMD EPYC 8434P, a 40.9% advantage. Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 26.6% lead (1018 vs 804).

Q: Where does the AMD EPYC 8434P outperform the Intel Xeon 6745P?

A: The AMD EPYC 8434P wins in PassMark data encryption (97254 vs 66665, a 31.5% edge), integer math (385290 vs 336926, a 12.6% edge), and data compression (1412835 vs 1352801, a 4.2% edge).

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The AMD EPYC 8434P has 48 cores and 96 threads, while the Intel Xeon 6745P has 32 cores and 64 threads.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The Intel Xeon 6745P supports eight-channel DDR5 with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the AMD EPYC 8434P supports six-channel DDR5 with 230.4 GB/s.

Q: What is the largest single benchmark delta between the two?

A: In PassMark find prime numbers, the Intel Xeon 6745P scores 681 versus 298 for AMD, a 128.5% difference—the largest margin in either direction.

# Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon 6745P | AMD EPYC 8434P |

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

| Cores | 32 | 48 |

| Threads | 64 | 96 |

| Base Clock | 3.10 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.30 GHz | 3.10 GHz |

| TDP | 300 W | 200 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 4710 | AMD Socket SP6 |

| Architecture | Granite Rapids | Zen 4c |

| Codename | Granite Rapids | Siena |

| Process Node | 5 nm (Intel) | 5 nm (TSMC) |

| Die Size | 2x 598 mm² | 4x 73 mm² |

| Transistors | Not specified | 35,500 million |

| L1 Cache | 112 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 336 MB (shared) | 128 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Eight-channel | Six-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 409.6 GB/s | 230.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 88 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 96 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Release Date | 2025-02-23 | 2023-09-17 |

# Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon 6745P is the clear choice for workloads that prioritize raw compute throughput per core and high clock speeds. Its wins span rendering, simulation, and general productivity. The Cinebench results—all showing approximately 26.7% advantages—indicate strong performance in 3D rendering and content creation tasks that scale with multi-core performance but also benefit from high single-core speed. The PassMark physics score (6144 vs 4036, a 52.2% edge) points to advantages in real-time simulation and game physics engines. Extended instructions (25.7% lead) suggest better support for vectorized and SIMD workloads. Floating-point math (24% lead) favors scientific computing and financial modeling. Prime number finding (128.5% lead) indicates exceptional integer latency performance, useful in cryptography-adjacent math and number theory applications.

The AMD EPYC 8434P’s wins define its niche. Its 31.5% lead in data encryption makes it the better choice for security appliances, VPN gateways, and any workload heavily dependent on cryptographic operations. The 12.6% advantage in integer math suggests strengths in database operations, file system processing, and general integer-heavy business logic. Data compression (4.2% lead) points to utility in backup systems, log processing, and data warehousing. With 48 cores and 96 threads versus 32 and 64, the AMD part also offers higher raw thread counts for massively parallel tasks that can tolerate lower per-core performance.

# The Verdict

The benchmark data provides a clear, if not entirely one-sided, picture. The Intel Xeon 6745P is the superior processor for the majority of workloads, winning 13 of 16 head-to-head tests and delivering consistent 26.7% advantages across all Cinebench versions. Its 40.9% single-thread lead and 128.5% prime-number advantage demonstrate a per-core performance level that the AMD EPYC 8434P cannot match, despite having 50% more cores. For users running rendering, simulation, scientific computing, or any mixed workload where single-thread performance matters, the Intel Xeon 6745P is the data-supported choice.

The AMD EPYC 8434P, however, is not without compelling strengths. Its dominance in encryption (31.5% lead) and integer math (12.6% lead) makes it a specialized tool for security-focused deployments and data processing pipelines. Its 96 threads and lower 200 W TDP also suggest advantages in power-constrained environments or highly parallel, throughput-oriented tasks where the 48-core configuration can be fully utilized. The 4.2% data compression win is modest but real.

The verdict from the data: choose the Intel Xeon 6745P for maximum per-core performance, highest memory bandwidth (409.6 GB/s vs 230.4 GB/s), and broad workload superiority. Choose the AMD EPYC 8434P specifically for cryptographic workloads, integer-heavy data processing, and scenarios where 96 threads at 200 W TDP are more valuable than 64 threads at 300 W. The Intel part’s launch MSRP is $5250, while AMD’s is $2700, but the performance data shows Intel earning its premium across most benchmark categories.