AMD EPYC 8534P vs Intel Xeon 6740P Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data paints a surprisingly lopsided picture on the surface, with Intel Xeon 6740P claiming 13 of the 16 head-to-head tests. But the margins and the specific workloads tell a more nuanced story. The Intel part dominates the Cinebench suite with consistent -18.4% deltas across R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests, scoring 7544 vs 6160, 31437 vs 25668, and 74851 vs 61115 respectively. The single-core Cinebench results mirror this pattern almost exactly, with Intel ahead by -18.4% in R20 (4438 vs 3623) and -18.4% in R23 (8628 vs 4438 is not the pairing; actual figures are 4438 vs 3623 for R20 and the R23 single-core scores are 8628 for AMD and the Intel figure is not directly paired in the head-to-head, but the R15 single-core shows 1065 vs 869, a -18.4% delta).

The Passmark multi-thread test reinforces Intel's overall throughput advantage, showing 88061 vs 71900, another -18.4% delta. Intel also crushes AMD in physics simulation (9705 vs 3667, a -62.2% delta) and prime number finding (822 vs 278, a -66.2% delta). Random string sorting goes to Intel by -26% (175015 vs 129479). Even in floating-point math, where AMD's Zen 4c architecture might be expected to compete, Intel edges ahead by -2.2% (296102 vs 289443).

However, AMD EPYC 8534P's three wins are not marginal. The data encryption test shows a massive 48.4% advantage for AMD (121728 vs 82028), suggesting the Zen 4c core's cryptographic instructions are substantially more efficient. Integer math also goes decisively to AMD at 32.4% (514526 vs 388500). The third AMD win comes in data compression with a 16.6% margin (1791742 vs 1537129). These are not incidental victories; they point to architectural strengths in specific computational domains. The extended instructions test is nearly a tie, with Intel ahead by just -3.5% (116992 vs 112860). The data suggests Intel wins broadly but AMD wins deeply where it matters for certain workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies despite both being built on 5 nm processes. AMD's EPYC 8534P uses the Zen 4c architecture under the "Siena" codename, part of the EPYC 8004 series. It packs 64 cores and 128 threads, whereas Intel's Granite Rapids-based Xeon 6740P offers 48 cores and 96 threads. This 16-core difference partially explains why AMD can compete in throughput-oriented tasks despite losing to Intel's higher clocks.

The cache hierarchy reveals a significant divergence. AMD provides 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, with 128 MB of shared L3 cache. Intel counters with a larger 112 KB L1 and 2 MB L2 per core, plus a massive 288 MB shared L3. Intel's larger caches likely contribute to its physics and prime number performance advantages, where working sets can stay resident in cache. The die size difference is stark: AMD uses four 73 mm² dies (totaling 292 mm²), while Intel uses two 598 mm² dies (totaling 1196 mm²). Intel's transistors count is not listed, but AMD's is 35,500 million.

Memory architecture also diverges sharply. AMD supports six-channel DDR5 with 230.4 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel runs eight-channel DDR5 at 409.6 GB/s. That 179.2 GB/s bandwidth advantage for Intel is substantial and likely feeds many of its multi-core wins. PCIe lanes favor AMD at 96 Gen 5 lanes versus Intel's 88 Gen 5 lanes, a modest but real difference for I/O-heavy servers. Both support ECC memory. Intel's socket is Socket 4710, AMD's is SP6, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. Intel lists integrated graphics as "N/A," while AMD does not list any.

FAQ

Q: Why does AMD win data encryption by such a large margin?

A: The benchmark shows AMD EPYC 8534P scoring 121728 versus Intel's 82028 in Passmark's data encryption test, a 48.4% advantage. This likely reflects Zen 4c's dedicated cryptographic instruction throughput, which appears substantially more efficient than Granite Rapids' implementation for this specific workload.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 8534P has 64 cores and 128 threads, while the Intel Xeon 6740P has 48 cores and 96 threads. AMD's 16-core and 32-thread advantage is notable, yet Intel still wins most multi-threaded benchmarks, indicating per-core performance differences.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: Intel Xeon 6740P supports eight-channel DDR5 providing 409.6 GB/s, while AMD EPYC 8534P uses six-channel DDR5 at 230.4 GB/s. Intel's bandwidth is roughly 78% higher, which helps explain its dominance in memory-sensitive workloads like physics simulation and random string sorting.

Q: Are both processors on the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both are fabricated on a 5 nm process, but by different foundries. AMD uses TSMC, while Intel uses its own fabs. This process parity means the performance differences come from architecture, cache size, memory channels, and core counts rather than lithography.

Q: How do their boost clocks compare?

A: Intel Xeon 6740P has a boost clock of 3.80 GHz, while AMD EPYC 8534P boosts to 3.10 GHz. Intel's 0.70 GHz higher boost clock is a key factor in its single-core and lightly-threaded benchmark wins, such as the -17.9% single-thread Passmark advantage.

Q: What is the release timeline?

A: AMD EPYC 8534P was released on 2023-09-17, while Intel Xeon 6740P launched later on 2025-02-23. The AMD part has been available for roughly 17 months longer, making Intel the newer design in this comparison.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 8534P | Intel Xeon 6740P |

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

| Cores | 64 | 48 |

| Threads | 128 | 96 |

| Base Clock | 2.30 GHz | 2.10 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.10 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| TDP | 200 W | 270 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP6 | Intel Socket 4710 |

| Architecture | Zen 4c | Granite Rapids |

| Codename | Siena | Granite Rapids |

| Generation | EPYC (Zen 4c (Siena)) | Xeon 6 (Granite Rapids-SP) |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 35,500 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 4x 73 mm² | 2x 598 mm² |

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

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

| L3 Cache | 128 MB (shared) | 288 MB (shared) |

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

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

| PCIe Lanes | 96 Gen 5 | 88 Gen 5 |

| Integrated Graphics | Not listed | N/A |

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

| Launch MSRP | $4950 | $4650 |

| Part Number | 100-000000875 | SRV5R |

Where Each One Wins

Intel Xeon 6740P wins in rendering and compute-heavy workloads. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 74851 versus 61115 indicates a 22.5% advantage in 3D rendering tasks. For physics simulation, Intel's 9705 versus 3667 represents a 2.6x advantage, making it the clear choice for scientific computing with heavy physics solvers. Prime number finding shows a 3x gap (822 vs 278), pointing to Intel's strength in integer-heavy algorithmic work despite AMD's integer math win. Random string sorting, a memory-latency-sensitive workload, goes to Intel by 35% (175015 vs 129479). The single-thread performance gap (-17.9% in Passmark, -18.4% in Cinebench R15) makes Intel preferable for lightly-threaded legacy applications.

AMD EPYC 8534P wins in security and data-centric workloads. Data encryption at 121728 versus 82028 is a 48.4% lead, making it the obvious choice for VPN gateways, TLS termination, or any encryption-heavy infrastructure. Integer math at 514526 versus 388500 (32.4% ahead) benefits financial modeling, database operations, and general integer computation. Data compression at 1791742 versus 1537129 (16.6% ahead) suits storage servers, backup systems, and data pipelines that compress data in transit or at rest. The 64-core/128-thread configuration also gives AMD an edge in highly parallel, memory-tolerant workloads where Intel's per-core advantage is less relevant.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear workload-based split. Choose the Intel Xeon 6740P for general-purpose compute, rendering, physics simulation, and any application that benefits from higher clock speeds (boost 3.80 GHz vs 3.10 GHz) and substantially more memory bandwidth (409.6 GB/s vs 230.4 GB/s). Intel's consistent -18.4% deltas across the Cinebench suite and Passmark multi-thread tests demonstrate broad multi-core superiority, despite having 16 fewer cores. The 288 MB L3 cache versus 128 MB likely drives the wins in physics (9705 vs 3667) and prime finding (822 vs 278).

Choose the AMD EPYC 8534P for security-focused deployments, data compression workloads, and integer-heavy processing. The 48.4% encryption advantage and 32.4% integer math lead are not marginal; they represent architectural strengths that will translate to real-world gains in these specific domains. The 16.6% data compression win also makes AMD attractive for storage-centric servers. With 96 PCIe lanes versus 88, AMD also offers more I/O expansion headroom. Both processors sit at the 98th percentile among all CPUs, but the average benchmark scores tell the story: AMD's average is 185092, while Intel's is 176227, a reversal of the head-to-head results that reflects AMD's strength in the data-heavy Passmark tests. The decision comes down to whether broad compute performance (Intel) or specialized data and security workloads (AMD) matter more for your specific server role.