CPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data shows a clear split: AMD EPYC 9355P wins 12 of 16 tests, while Intel Xeon 6740P takes 4. The AMD part dominates in CPU-intensive workloads across the board. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 82,666 versus 74,851 for the Xeon, a 9.5% margin. Single-core results mirror this: R23 single-core shows 11,670 for AMD against 4,438 for the Intel part in R20, though those are different test versions, the deltas in matching tests are consistent. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core all show the AMD winning by exactly 9.5%, while single-core tests in R15 and R20 show 9.4% margins. The largest multi-core gap appears in PassMark physics, where AMD leads 13,515 to 9,705, a 28.2% advantage.

Intel's wins are concentrated in specialized workloads. The Xeon leads data compression by 7.5% (1,537,129 vs 1,429,976), floating-point math by 15.4% (296,102 vs 256,635), and extended instructions by 8.7% (116,992 vs 107,622). Data encryption shows a narrow 1.3% edge for Intel (82,028 vs 80,961). Notably, Intel's largest win, floating-point math, comes against a lower-core-count rival, suggesting efficiency in that specific instruction mix rather than raw throughput. The AMD part counters with a 21.3% lead in prime number finding (1,044 vs 822) and a 20.6% lead in single-thread performance (3,747 vs 2,975), which is the largest single-core delta in the entire dataset.

The aggregate benchmark score tells a different story than the head-to-head count. Intel's average benchmark score is 176,227, placing it 98th percentile among all CPUs, while AMD's average is 160,358, also 98th percentile. This seems contradictory given AMD's 12 wins, but the averages include all benchmarks in each processor's full suite, not just the shared head-to-head tests. Intel's nearest rivals include AMD EPYC 7763 (average 179,916, 2.1% higher) and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX (182,700, 3.5% higher), while AMD's rivals include Intel Xeon 676X (158,540, 1.1% lower) and EPYC 9375F (162,497, 1.3% higher). The percentile fields confirm both are top-tier parts, but the head-to-head data reveals where each excels.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally in design. Intel Xeon 6740P uses Granite Rapids architecture on a 5 nm process from Intel's own foundry, with a die size of 2x 598 mm². AMD EPYC 9355P uses Zen 5 (Turin) architecture on a 4 nm process from TSMC, with 8x 70.6 mm² chiplets and 66,520 million transistors. The core counts differ substantially: Intel provides 48 cores and 96 threads, while AMD provides 32 cores and 64 threads. Despite having 50% more cores, Intel cannot match AMD in most head-to-head tests, indicating the Zen 5 cores deliver significantly higher per-thread throughput.

Cache hierarchies reflect different design philosophies. Intel allocates 112 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and a shared 288 MB L3. AMD provides 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 256 MB shared L3. Intel's larger per-core L2 and bigger total L3 give it a cache advantage, yet AMD still wins most tests. Clock speeds favor AMD decisively: base clock of 3.55 GHz versus 2.10 GHz, boost clock of 4.40 GHz versus 3.80 GHz. The 1.45 GHz base clock gap and 0.60 GHz boost gap explain much of AMD's single-thread dominance (20.6% in PassMark single-thread).

Memory subsystems also differ. Intel uses eight-channel DDR5 with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth, while AMD uses twelve-channel DDR5 with 576.0 GB/s. AMD's 40.6% higher memory bandwidth likely contributes to its wins in memory-sensitive integer math (412,067 vs 388,500, a 5.7% edge) and random string sorting (176,697 vs 175,015, a 1% edge). PCIe connectivity favors AMD with 128 Gen 5 lanes versus Intel's 88 Gen 5 lanes, a 45.5% difference. Both support DDR5 with ECC, and neither has integrated graphics. TDP ratings are close: Intel 270 W, AMD 280 W. The launch MSRP for Intel is $4650, while AMD is $2998.

Where Each One Wins

AMD EPYC 9355P wins across the board in rendering and general compute. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests all show AMD leading by 9.5%, which is remarkable given Intel's 48-core count versus AMD's 32 cores. This makes AMD the clear choice for 3D rendering, video encoding, and any workload that scales across Cinebench-style multithreaded tasks. The 28.2% lead in physics simulation reinforces this, AMD is substantially better for physics-based compute, likely due to higher per-core efficiency combined with higher clocks. Single-thread performance is also firmly AMD's territory, with a 20.6% lead in PassMark single-thread and 9.4% leads in Cinebench single-core tests. Integer math favors AMD by 5.7%, and prime number finding by 21.3%, suggesting AMD handles branch-heavy, integer-bound algorithms better.

Intel Xeon 6740P wins in floating-point math by 15.4%, which is its largest margin. This points toward scientific computing, financial modeling, and engineering simulation workloads that rely heavily on FPU throughput. Data compression favors Intel by 7.5%, making it suitable for database compression, backup systems, and file archival tasks. Extended instructions show an 8.7% Intel lead, indicating better support for SIMD-heavy code paths. Data encryption is essentially a tie (1.3% Intel lead), so either processor works for cryptography workloads. Intel's four wins are all in specialized, instruction-specific areas rather than general compute, suggesting it is a niche performer against AMD's broader dominance.

The average benchmark scores position both at the 98th percentile of all CPUs, but the head-to-head results show AMD winning 12 of 16 tests. Intel's wins, while fewer, are concentrated in areas where its larger cache (288 MB L3 vs 256 MB) and higher core count can be leveraged, floating-point math and data compression both benefit from larger working sets and parallel FPUs. AMD's wins in 12 tests span both single-threaded and multithreaded workloads, making it the more versatile processor for mixed workloads.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD EPYC 9355P wins 12 of 16 head-to-head tests, while the Intel Xeon 6740P wins 4.

Q: How large is AMD's single-thread advantage?

A: AMD leads by 20.6% in PassMark single-thread (3,747 vs 2,975) and by 9.4% in Cinebench R15 and R20 single-core tests.

Q: In which benchmark does Intel have its biggest win?

A: Intel's largest margin is in PassMark floating-point math, where it leads by 15.4% (296,102 vs 256,635).

Q: What is AMD's biggest win margin?

A: AMD leads by 28.2% in PassMark physics (13,515 vs 9,705), which is the largest delta in the entire head-to-head dataset.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon 6740P and AMD EPYC 9355P list ECC memory support as true.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: Intel's average benchmark score is 176,227, while AMD's is 160,358. Both are at the 98th percentile of all CPUs.

The Verdict

The data recommends the AMD EPYC 9355P for most buyers. It wins 75% of head-to-head tests, including every Cinebench multi-core benchmark, despite having 16 fewer cores and 32 fewer threads than the Intel part. The 20.6% single-thread lead, 28.2% physics lead, and 9.5% multi-core lead indicate Zen 5's per-core efficiency is overwhelming Intel's core-count advantage. For rendering, simulation, general server workloads, and any single-threaded application, the EPYC is clearly superior based on the benchmark data.

The Intel Xeon 6740P is the choice only for specific workloads where its wins matter. The 15.4% floating-point math advantage makes it attractive for scientific computing and engineering analysis. The 7.5% data compression lead suits storage servers and database systems. The 8.7% extended instructions lead helps with SIMD-heavy code. However, these niche wins do not offset AMD's dominance in 12 other tests. The Intel part's higher average benchmark score (176,227 vs 160,358) reflects its full suite including tests not in the head-to-head set, but in direct comparisons, AMD wins more often and by larger margins in general compute.

For a buyer choosing between these two, the data says: pick AMD for versatility and raw speed, pick Intel only if your workload is specifically heavy in floating-point math, data compression, or extended instruction sets. AMD's lower core count (32 vs 48) with higher clocks (4.40 vs 3.80 GHz boost) delivers better results in most tests, and its twelve-channel memory (576.0 GB/s) provides 40.6% more bandwidth than Intel's eight-channel (409.6 GB/s). The 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes versus 88 also offer more I/O expansion headroom.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon 6740P | AMD EPYC 9355P |

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

| Cores | 48 | 32 |

| Threads | 96 | 64 |

| Base Clock | 2.10 GHz | 3.55 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.80 GHz | 4.40 GHz |

| TDP | 270 W | 280 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 4710 | AMD Socket SP5 |

| Architecture | Granite Rapids | Zen 5 |

| Codename | Granite Rapids | Turin |

| Generation | Xeon 6 (Granite Rapids-SP) | EPYC (Zen 5 (Turin)) |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 4 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die Size | 2x 598 mm² | 8x 70.6 mm² |

| Transistors | Not specified | 66,520 million |

| L1 Cache | 112 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

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

| L3 Cache | 288 MB (shared) | 256 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Eight-channel | Twelve-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 409.6 GB/s | 576.0 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 88 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 128 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Launch MSRP | $4650 | $2998 |