AMD EPYC 9255 vs Intel Xeon 6730P Comparison

The Intel Xeon 6730P and AMD EPYC 9255 are both high-end server processors aimed at the same dense compute segment, yet they achieve their performance through fundamentally different design philosophies. The benchmark data reveals a clear split: the AMD EPYC 9255 dominates in general-purpose and single-threaded workloads, while the Intel Xeon 6730P counters with decisive victories in specialized, data-intensive tasks. The head-to-head results show 13 wins for the AMD part against 4 for the Intel part, but the magnitude and nature of those wins tell a more nuanced story about where each chip belongs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern in the head-to-head data is the consistency of the AMD EPYC 9255’s lead in Cinebench tests. Across all six Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 benchmarks, the AMD part wins by a nearly identical margin of 2.0% to 2.1%. For instance, in Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 9255 scores 64,318 against the Xeon 6730P’s 62,996, a 2.1% edge. This uniformity suggests that the EPYC’s advantage is structural—tied to its higher base and boost clocks—rather than workload-specific. The single-core Cinebench R23 result reinforces this: 9,080 for AMD versus 8,893 for Intel, again a 2.1% gap.

The PassMark suite amplifies this single-threaded disparity. In PassMark single-thread, the EPYC 9255 posts 3,655 versus Intel’s 2,995, a commanding 18.1% lead. This is the largest single delta in the entire comparison and highlights the Zen 5 architecture’s ability to extract more instructions per clock at higher frequencies. The same theme appears in PassMark physics, where AMD wins 9,740 to 8,606 (11.6% ahead), and in random string sorting, where AMD takes 129,202 to 113,919 (11.8% ahead). These are latency-sensitive and branch-heavy workloads that reward raw clock speed and per-core efficiency.

However, the Intel Xeon 6730P fights back in workloads that leverage its massive 288 MB L3 cache and wider vector units. The biggest win for Intel comes in PassMark extended instructions, where it scores 96,204 against AMD’s 75,185—a 28% advantage. This suggests that the Xeon’s AVX-512 implementation is significantly more effective for compute-heavy, vectorized code. Similarly, in floating-point math, Intel wins 226,838 to 183,367, a 23.7% margin. The data compression test also favors Intel decisively: 1,138,470 versus 1,018,904, an 11.7% lead, likely reflecting the large L3 cache’s ability to hold more working data. Intel also wins in prime number finding (686 vs 580, an 18.3% lead), a workload that often benefits from cache residency and integer throughput.

The remaining benchmarks show AMD winning by smaller margins. In integer math, AMD takes 306,442 to 290,740 (5.1% ahead), and in data encryption, AMD wins 59,668 to 55,964 (6.2% ahead). The PassMark multithread score goes to AMD at 76,580 versus 74,113 (3.2% ahead), despite Intel having 32 cores versus AMD’s 24. This is a notable result—it implies that AMD’s per-core throughput is high enough to overcome a 33% core count deficit in mixed threaded workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon 6730P has a higher average benchmark score of 124,756, compared to the AMD EPYC 9255’s 116,388. This is despite the fact that AMD wins more individual head-to-head tests, because Intel’s wins in data compression and extended instructions are large enough to boost its average.

Q: How does the core count difference affect multithreaded performance?

A: The Intel Xeon 6730P has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the AMD EPYC 9255 has 24 cores and 48 threads. Despite having 8 fewer cores, the EPYC 9255 wins the Cinebench R23 multi-core test (64,318 vs 62,996) and the PassMark multithread test (76,580 vs 74,113), indicating that its higher clock speeds and per-core efficiency more than compensate for the core deficit in these workloads.

Q: Which processor is better for vectorized or SIMD workloads?

A: The Intel Xeon 6730P is clearly superior for vectorized workloads. In PassMark extended instructions, it leads by 28% (96,204 vs 75,185), and in floating-point math, it leads by 23.7% (226,838 vs 183,367). This suggests that the Xeon’s implementation of advanced instruction sets is far more effective for scientific and numerical computing.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two?

A: The AMD EPYC 9255 supports a twelve-channel memory bus with a theoretical bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s. The Intel Xeon 6730P supports an eight-channel bus with 409.6 GB/s. This 166.4 GB/s difference gives AMD a substantial advantage in memory-bound applications, though the benchmark data shows Intel still wins in data compression, which is often memory-intensive.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon 6730P and the AMD EPYC 9255 have an active production status. The Intel part was released on 2025-02-23, while the AMD part was released earlier on 2024-10-09.

Q: How do these processors compare to other high-end server chips?

A: The Intel Xeon 6730P has a percentile rank of 97 among all CPUs, with its nearest rival being the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX (0.5% ahead) and the AMD EPYC 9354 (1.6% behind). The AMD EPYC 9255 also has a 97th percentile rank, with its nearest rival being the Intel Xeon 658X (0.3% ahead) and the AMD EPYC 9384X (3.4% behind).

Architecture Differences

The architectural divergence between these two processors is profound. The Intel Xeon 6730P is built on the Granite Rapids architecture, specifically the Granite Rapids-SP generation, using a 5 nm process node fabricated by Intel. Its die is composed of two separate dies totaling 2x 598 mm². In contrast, the AMD EPYC 9255 is based on Zen 5 architecture (codename Turin) from the EPYC 9005 series, using a more advanced 4 nm process node from TSMC. AMD’s chiplet design uses four dies of 70.6 mm² each, totaling 33,260 million transistors.

The cache hierarchies are fundamentally different. Intel allocates 112 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2 per core, but more importantly, it provides a massive 288 MB of shared L3 cache. AMD provides 80 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, with a smaller 128 MB of shared L3. This 160 MB difference in L3 cache is a primary driver of Intel’s wins in data compression and extended instructions, as larger caches can hold more working sets and reduce memory latency.

The memory controllers also differ significantly. The Intel Xeon 6730P uses an eight-channel DDR5 interface with 409.6 GB/s of bandwidth, while the AMD EPYC 9255 uses a twelve-channel interface with 576.0 GB/s. Similarly, PCIe capabilities differ: Intel offers Gen 5 with 88 lanes (CPU only), while AMD offers Gen 5 with 128 lanes (CPU only). Both support ECC memory and lack integrated graphics, targeting pure server workloads.

Clock speeds favor AMD significantly. The EPYC 9255 has a base clock of 3.25 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, compared to the Xeon 6730P’s 2.50 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost. This 1.0 GHz boost clock advantage is the primary reason AMD wins all single-threaded and most latency-sensitive benchmarks. The TDP also differs, with Intel rated at 250 W and AMD at 200 W, though the thermal design implications are complex given the different core counts.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. The core and thread counts are the most obvious: Intel has 32 cores and 64 threads, while AMD has 24 cores and 48 threads—a 33% difference in core count. The base clock differs by 0.75 GHz in favor of AMD (3.25 GHz vs 2.50 GHz), and the boost clock differs by 1.0 GHz (4.80 GHz vs 3.80 GHz). TDP is 50 W lower on the AMD part (200 W vs 250 W).

The process node and foundry are distinct: Intel uses its own 5 nm process, while AMD uses TSMC’s 4 nm process. The die configurations are vastly different, with Intel using two large 598 mm² dies and AMD using four small 70.6 mm² dies. Transistor counts are only listed for AMD at 33,260 million. The L1 cache per core is 112 KB on Intel versus 80 KB on AMD, and L2 is 2 MB versus 1 MB per core. L3 cache is 288 MB shared on Intel versus 128 MB shared on AMD.

Memory support is where they diverge most in platform capability: Intel uses eight-channel DDR5 with 409.6 GB/s, while AMD uses twelve-channel DDR5 with 576.0 GB/s. PCIe lane counts are 88 (Intel) versus 128 (AMD), both Gen 5. The sockets are incompatible: Intel Socket 4710 versus AMD Socket SP5. Release dates are separated by several months, with Intel launching on 2025-02-23 and AMD on 2024-10-09. The launch MSRP for the Intel Xeon 6730P is $3726, while the AMD EPYC 9255 has a launch MSRP of $2495. Both have locked multipliers and are in the server/workstation market segment.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 9255 is the clear choice for general-purpose server workloads that depend on single-threaded performance and high clock speeds. Its 18.1% lead in PassMark single-thread and 11.6% lead in physics make it superior for database transaction processing, web serving, and any latency-sensitive application where a single core’s speed dictates response time. The 11.8% win in random string sorting reinforces this, as sorting algorithms are notoriously branch-heavy and clock-speed-limited. For mixed multithreaded workloads, the EPYC’s 3.2% win in PassMark multithread and 2.1% win in Cinebench R23 multi-core show that it can handle high core-count tasks effectively despite having fewer cores, making it a versatile all-rounder.

The Intel Xeon 6730P is the specialist for compute-intensive, vectorized, and cache-heavy workloads. Its 28% lead in extended instructions and 23.7% lead in floating-point math make it the superior choice for scientific computing, financial modeling, and any code that leverages AVX-512 or similar SIMD instruction sets. The 18.3% win in prime number finding and 11.7% win in data compression suggest that workloads with high data reuse benefit greatly from the 288 MB L3 cache. For environments running large in-memory databases or data analytics that can exploit its 64 threads and massive cache, the Xeon 6730P’s 4 wins in the head-to-head are strategically significant, even if they are fewer in number.

The data ultimately shows a trade-off between raw per-core speed and specialized throughput. The AMD EPYC 9255 wins the majority of tests by leveraging its 4.80 GHz boost clock, while the Intel Xeon 6730P wins the workloads that matter most for HPC and data compression by leveraging its architectural advantages in cache and vector processing. The choice between them depends entirely on whether the target workload is latency-bound (favoring AMD) or throughput-bound with high data locality (favoring Intel).