CPU Comparison

The Intel Xeon 6731P and AMD EPYC 9135 are both actively produced server/workstation processors aimed at the same market segment, but the benchmark data reveals a clear divergence in their performance profiles. Across the 17 head-to-head tests, the AMD EPYC 9135 takes 12 wins, while the Intel Xeon 6731P secures 5. However, this is not a simple case of dominance; the nature of the wins is heavily workload-dependent, with each chip carving out a distinct niche. The data shows a fundamental trade-off between sheer single-thread capability and parallel processing throughput on the AMD side, versus specialized instruction and math throughput on the Intel side.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the entire dataset is in the PassMark single-thread test. The AMD EPYC 9135 scores 3672, while the Intel Xeon 6731P manages only 2107. This represents a 42.6% advantage for the AMD part, which is the largest delta in either direction across all tests. This is a decisive victory for AMD in lightly-threaded or latency-sensitive workloads, and it is consistent with the AMD chip's higher base and boost clock speeds of 3.65 GHz and 4.30 GHz, respectively, compared to Intel's 2.50 GHz and 4.10 GHz.

The AMD EPYC 9135 also sweeps the entire Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 49136 against Intel's 44871, an 8.7% lead. The same 8.7% delta appears consistently across Cinebench R15 and R20, in both single-core and multi-core tests. This uniformity suggests a consistent architectural efficiency advantage in the Zen 5 core design for this rendering workload, rather than a scaling advantage from the Intel chip's higher core count. The AMD part also wins the PassMark multithread test with a score of 57170 versus Intel's 52790, a 7.7% margin, further confirming its overall throughput lead in general parallel tasks.

However, the Intel Xeon 6731P fights back decisively in specific computational areas. Its largest win comes in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where it scores 541 against the AMD's 292, an 85.3% advantage. This is a massive, unequivocal victory for Intel in integer-heavy, branch-intensive workloads. Similarly, the Intel chip leads in PassMark physics (7105 vs 5477, a 29.7% delta) and floating point math (157330 vs 126679, a 24.2% delta). These wins indicate that the Intel architecture is substantially stronger in raw mathematical computation, particularly in floating-point operations.

The remaining wins are split. Intel leads in data compression (799474 vs 739277, an 8.1% delta) and extended instructions (65656 vs 55822, a 17.6% delta), showcasing its strength in specialized SIMD and compression algorithms. The AMD EPYC 9135, meanwhile, edges out Intel in integer math (202962 vs 198761, a 2.1% delta) and random string sorting (90064 vs 88019, a 2.3% delta), while the data encryption test is nearly a tie, with AMD ahead by a mere 0.5% (40295 vs 40087). The overall average benchmark score reflects this split, with Intel at 87756 and AMD at 82980, though the AMD chip maintains a higher percentile rank at 96, tied with Intel's 96th percentile.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-threaded tasks?

A: The AMD EPYC 9135 is significantly faster. In the PassMark single-thread test, it scores 3672 compared to the Intel Xeon 6731P's 2107, a 42.6% advantage. It also holds a consistent 8.7% lead in all Cinebench single-core tests.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon 6731P's higher core count give it a multi-core advantage?

A: No, it does not. Despite having 32 cores and 64 threads versus the AMD EPYC 9135's 16 cores and 32 threads, the Intel chip loses in Cinebench R23 multi-core (44871 vs 49136) and PassMark multithread (52790 vs 57170). The AMD chip's architectural efficiency overcomes the core count deficit.

Q: Are there any workloads where the Intel Xeon 6731P is overwhelmingly superior?

A: Yes. The Intel chip shows an 85.3% advantage in the PassMark find prime numbers test (541 vs 292) and a 24.2% lead in floating point math (157330 vs 126679). It also leads in physics (29.7%) and extended instructions (17.6%).

Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD EPYC 9135 has a higher memory bandwidth at 576.0 GB/s, compared to the Intel Xeon 6731P's 409.6 GB/s. This is supported by its twelve-channel memory bus versus Intel's eight-channel bus.

Q: How do the two processors compare in terms of process node and foundry?

A: The AMD EPYC 9135 is built on a 4 nm process by TSMC, while the Intel Xeon 6731P is built on a 5 nm process by Intel. The AMD chip also uses a chiplet design with two 70.6 mm² dies, whereas Intel uses a monolithic 598 mm² die.

Q: What is the difference in their launch MSRP?

A: The Intel Xeon 6731P has a launch MSRP of $2700. The AMD EPYC 9135 has a launch MSRP of $1214.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The Intel Xeon 6731P is based on the Granite Rapids architecture, specifically the Granite Rapids-SP generation, and is fabricated on Intel's 5 nm process node. It is a monolithic design with a large die size of 598 mm². In contrast, the AMD EPYC 9135 uses the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Turin, part of the EPYC 9005 series. It is fabricated by TSMC on a more advanced 4 nm process node and uses a chiplet design, consisting of two separate 70.6 mm² dies, totaling 16,630 million transistors.

The core configurations differ sharply. Intel's chip packs 32 cores and 64 threads, with a large 144 MB shared L3 cache. Each core has 112 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2 cache. The AMD chip offers 16 cores and 32 threads, with a 64 MB shared L3 cache and smaller per-core caches of 80 KB L1 and 1 MB L2. Despite having half the cores, the AMD chip's cache hierarchy is sufficient to power its benchmark wins.

Memory architecture also sets them apart. The Intel Xeon 6731P supports DDR5 memory across an eight-channel bus, delivering a theoretical bandwidth of 409.6 GB/s. The AMD EPYC 9135 supports DDR5 across a twelve-channel bus, providing a higher bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. In terms of I/O, Intel provides 136 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), while AMD provides 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only). Neither has integrated graphics.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two parts, highlighting their distinct design philosophies:

• Cores: Intel has 32; AMD has 16.
• Threads: Intel has 64; AMD has 32.
• Base Clock: Intel is 2.50 GHz; AMD is 3.65 GHz.
• Boost Clock: Intel is 4.10 GHz; AMD is 4.30 GHz.
• TDP: Intel is 245 W; AMD is 200 W.
• Socket: Intel uses Socket 4710; AMD uses Socket SP5.
• Architecture: Intel is Granite Rapids; AMD is Zen 5 (Turin).
• Process Node: Intel is 5 nm; AMD is 4 nm.
• Foundry: Intel is Intel; AMD is TSMC.
• Die Size: Intel is 598 mm²; AMD is 2x 70.6 mm².
• L1 Cache: Intel is 112 KB per core; AMD is 80 KB per core.
• L2 Cache: Intel is 2 MB per core; AMD is 1 MB per core.
• L3 Cache: Intel is 144 MB shared; AMD is 64 MB shared.
• Memory Bus: Intel is eight-channel; AMD is twelve-channel.
• Memory Bandwidth: Intel is 409.6 GB/s; AMD is 576.0 GB/s.
• PCIe Lanes: Intel is 136; AMD is 128.
• Release Date: Intel is 2025-02-23; AMD is 2024-10-09.
• Launch MSRP: Intel is $2700; AMD is $1214.
• Part Number: Intel is SRVNR; AMD is 100-000001150.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon 6731P is the clear winner in computational math and specific instruction-heavy tasks. Its 85.3% lead in the prime number test and 24.2% lead in floating point math make it the superior choice for workloads like scientific simulations, financial modeling, and any application that relies heavily on complex mathematical calculations. The 17.6% advantage in extended instructions and 8.1% lead in data compression also make it a strong candidate for high-performance computing clusters and data analytics that utilize AVX-style instructions or require fast compression/decompression. Its 29.7% lead in the physics test suggests suitability for physics simulation and engineering workloads.

The AMD EPYC 9135 is the better all-around performer, particularly for general-purpose server tasks. Its 42.6% lead in single-thread performance makes it ideal for database servers, web serving, and any workload with low thread counts but high responsiveness demands. The consistent 8.7% lead across all Cinebench tests, plus the 7.7% win in PassMark multithread, makes it a stronger choice for video rendering, 3D modeling, and general productivity applications. Its wins in integer math and random string sorting also point to efficiency in general data processing and text manipulation. The higher memory bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s positions it well for memory-bound workloads.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear choice based on workload profile. The AMD EPYC 9135 is the more versatile processor, winning the majority of benchmark categories and demonstrating superiority in both single-threaded and general multi-threaded applications. Its 42.6% single-thread lead is a decisive factor for any latency-sensitive task, and its sweep of the Cinebench suite indicates strong performance in content creation and rendering. With a 200 W TDP and a smaller die, it achieves these results more efficiently than the Intel part.

The Intel Xeon 6731P, however, is the specialist. It is the undisputed king of mathematical and scientific workloads, with an 85.3% lead in prime number finding and a 24.2% lead in floating point math. For users running high-performance computing applications, physics simulations, or heavy data compression, the Intel chip's raw computational throughput in these specific areas makes it the superior choice, despite its lower core count in this comparison. Its 245 W TDP and higher launch MSRP of $2700 reflect its positioning as a high-end compute-focused part. Ultimately, the decision rests on whether a workload is dominated by general-purpose computing (choose AMD) or by specialized mathematical and compression tasks (choose Intel).