AMD EPYC 9175F vs Intel Xeon 6731P Comparison

The AMD EPYC 9175F and Intel Xeon 6731P are both active server/workstation processors aimed at high-end compute, but the recorded benchmark data shows a decisive overall winner. Across 17 head-to-head tests, the AMD EPYC 9175F wins 16, while the Intel Xeon 6731P takes only one. The AMD part, built on Zen 5 (Turin) with a 4 nm TSMC process, delivers higher single-thread and multi-thread scores despite having half the cores of the Intel Xeon 6731P, which uses Granite Rapids on Intel's 5 nm node. The following analysis breaks down the data into practical categories.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon 6731P has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the AMD EPYC 9175F has 16 cores and 32 threads. Despite this 2x core advantage, the AMD part wins the multi-threaded Cinebench and Passmark tests.

Q: Which has higher single-thread performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 9175F dominates. In Passmark single thread, it scores 4256 versus 2107 for the Intel Xeon 6731P, a 102% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core also shows AMD ahead: 7895 versus 6334, a 24.6% advantage.

Q: Which has larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD EPYC 9175F has 512 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Xeon 6731P has 144 MB. The AMD part also has 1 MB L2 per core versus 2 MB per core on Intel, but the massive L3 difference is notable.

Q: Which supports higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD EPYC 9175F uses twelve-channel DDR5 with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel Xeon 6731P uses eight-channel DDR5 at 409.6 GB/s. Both support ECC memory.

Q: Which wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD EPYC 9175F scores 55923, compared to 44871 for the Intel Xeon 6731P, a 24.6% margin. This is consistent across all Cinebench versions (R15, R20, R23) for both multi-core and single-core.

Q: Which has a higher TDP?

A: The AMD EPYC 9175F has a TDP of 320 W, while the Intel Xeon 6731P has a TDP of 245 W. The AMD part draws more power but also delivers higher performance in nearly every test.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results split cleanly. The AMD EPYC 9175F wins every Cinebench test (R15, R20, R23, both multi-core and single-core) and the vast majority of Passmark workloads: data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, find prime numbers, integer math, multithread, physics, random string sorting, and single thread. The Intel Xeon 6731P wins only one test: Passmark floating point math, where it scores 157330 versus 145939 for AMD, a 7.2% advantage.

This pattern suggests the AMD part is the better choice for general compute, rendering, encryption, compression, and integer-heavy tasks. The Intel part's single win in floating point math indicates a potential niche for workloads that rely heavily on floating-point operations, such as certain scientific simulations or financial modeling. However, given that AMD wins 16 of 17 tests, the Intel advantage is narrow and isolated.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different designs. The AMD EPYC 9175F is based on Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Turin, and is part of the EPYC 9005 series. It is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a transistor count of 133,040 million and a die size listed as 16x 70.6 mm², indicating a multi-chiplet design. The Intel Xeon 6731P uses Granite Rapids architecture, part of the Xeon 6 (Granite Rapids-SP) generation, built on Intel's 5 nm process with a die size of 598 mm². Intel does not list a transistor count in the database.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. AMD provides 80 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, plus a shared 512 MB L3. Intel provides 112 KB L1 and 2 MB L2 per core, but only 144 MB shared L3. The AMD L3 is more than 3.5 times larger, which likely contributes to its strong performance in data-heavy workloads. Memory support also diverges: AMD uses twelve-channel DDR5 with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel uses eight-channel DDR5 at 409.6 GB/s. Both support ECC. PCIe lanes are close: AMD offers 128 Gen 5 lanes, Intel offers 136 Gen 5 lanes, both CPU-only.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two parts, based on the recorded data:

• Cores: AMD 16, Intel 32
• Threads: AMD 32, Intel 64
• Base clock: AMD 4.20 GHz, Intel 2.50 GHz
• Boost clock: AMD 5.00 GHz, Intel 4.10 GHz
• TDP: AMD 320 W, Intel 245 W
• Socket: AMD Socket SP5, Intel Socket 4710
• Process node: AMD 4 nm (TSMC), Intel 5 nm (Intel)
• Foundry: TSMC vs Intel
• Die size: AMD 16x 70.6 mm², Intel 598 mm²
• Transistors: AMD 133,040 million, Intel not listed
• L1 cache: AMD 80 KB per core, Intel 112 KB per core
• L2 cache: AMD 1 MB per core, Intel 2 MB per core
• L3 cache: AMD 512 MB shared, Intel 144 MB shared
• Memory bus: AMD twelve-channel, Intel eight-channel
• Memory bandwidth: AMD 576.0 GB/s, Intel 409.6 GB/s
• PCIe lanes: AMD 128, Intel 136
• Release date: AMD 2024-10-09, Intel 2025-02-23
• Launch MSRP: AMD $4256, Intel $2700

Both parts have no integrated graphics, are not multiplier unlocked, and are in the server/workstation market segment.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest margin in the entire comparison is in Passmark single thread, where the AMD EPYC 9175F scores 4256 versus 2107 for the Intel Xeon 6731P, a 102% advantage. This is a massive per-core performance gap, and it explains why AMD wins multi-threaded tests despite having half the cores. In Passmark physics, AMD leads 9984 to 7105, a 40.5% margin. Find prime numbers shows AMD at 741 versus 541, a 37% lead. Passmark multithread gives AMD 67634 versus 52790, a 28.1% advantage. All Cinebench tests (R15, R20, R23) show AMD ahead by exactly 24.6% in both multi-core and single-core variants. For example, Cinebench R23 multi-core: AMD 55923, Intel 44871; single-core: AMD 7895, Intel 6334.

Other Passmark wins for AMD include integer math (219800 vs 198761, 10.6%), random string sorting (95783 vs 88019, 8.8%), data compression (867186 vs 799474, 8.5%), extended instructions (70529 vs 65656, 7.4%), and data encryption (42297 vs 40087, 5.5%). The only Intel win is floating point math: 157330 vs 145939, a 7.2% margin. This single victory does not offset the overall pattern, but it does indicate a specific area where Intel's architecture holds an edge.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 9175F is the superior processor for nearly all workloads. It wins 16 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, including every multi-threaded test, despite having only 16 cores versus 32 on the Intel Xeon 6731P. The AMD part's 102% lead in single-thread performance and its 512 MB L3 cache likely drive these results. Its higher memory bandwidth (576.0 GB/s vs 409.6 GB/s) and twelve-channel support further reinforce its advantage in data-intensive tasks.

The Intel Xeon 6731P should only be considered if the workload is dominated by floating-point math, where it leads by 7.2%. For general server and workstation use, including rendering, compression, encryption, and integer processing, the AMD EPYC 9175F is the clear choice based on the recorded measurements. The AMD part also carries a higher TDP (320 W vs 245 W) and a higher launch MSRP ($4256 vs $2700), but the performance gap in its favor is substantial. The average benchmark score for AMD is 95615, compared to 87756 for Intel, a 9% overall difference. For most buyers, the AMD EPYC 9175F offers the better performance profile, with the Intel Xeon 6731P reserved for a narrow floating-point niche.