CPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data splits these two server processors into distinct personalities, with the AMD EPYC 9375F claiming 10 wins against the Intel Xeon 6740P’s 6. The most dramatic gap appears in PassMark’s find prime numbers test, where the EPYC 9375F scores 1397 against Intel’s 822, a 41.2% advantage that suggests a significant per-core algorithmic efficiency edge. Single-thread performance tells a similar story: the EPYC 9375F posts 3762 in PassMark single-thread versus 2975 for the Xeon, a 20.9% lead, and the Cinebench R15 single-core result shows 1158 versus 1065, an 8% margin.

Yet the Intel part fights back hard in specific workloads. Floating point math is a clear Intel stronghold, with the Xeon 6740P scoring 296102 against AMD’s 260392, a 13.7% victory. Data encryption also favors Intel substantially: 82028 versus 73634, an 11.4% delta. Random string sorting goes Intel’s way by 8.6% (175015 vs 161091), and physics simulation favors Intel by 7.6% (9705 vs 9019). Data compression is closer, with Intel ahead just 2.7% (1537129 vs 1496149), while integer math is nearly a dead heat at 388500 versus 387901, a 0.2% Intel edge.

The multi-core Cinebench results are consistently tight but favor AMD across all three versions. In R15 multi-core, the EPYC 9375F scores 8205 versus 7544 (8.1% ahead). R20 multi-core shows 34188 versus 31437 (8% ahead), and R23 multi-core lands at 81402 versus 74851 (8% ahead). The PassMark multithread test follows the same pattern: 95768 for AMD versus 88061 for Intel, again 8% apart. Extended instructions also go AMD’s way, 128296 versus 116992, an 8.8% margin.

What stands out is the consistency of the deltas. The Cinebench multi-core tests and PassMark multithread all cluster around 8%, while the single-core gap in PassMark balloons to 20.9%. This suggests the AMD architecture’s advantage scales with per-thread efficiency rather than raw core count, since Intel fields 48 cores against AMD’s 32.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon 6740P establishes its dominance in workloads that stress memory throughput and cryptographic operations. Data encryption at 11.4% ahead indicates the Xeon’s memory subsystem and instruction handling are well-suited for secure data processing. Floating point math, where Intel leads by 13.7%, points to scientific computing and simulation tasks benefiting from the Intel design. Random string sorting and physics both show Intel advantages above 7%, suggesting database sorting and physics-based workloads may favor this platform. Data compression is a narrow Intel win, and integer math is essentially tied, so general-purpose compute sees little differentiation.

The AMD EPYC 9375F is the clear choice for prime number finding, with that massive 41.2% lead signaling strong integer-heavy algorithmic work. Single-thread performance at 20.9% ahead in PassMark and 8% ahead in Cinebench R15 indicates responsiveness in lightly threaded applications. Extended instructions at 8.8% ahead suggests compiler-heavy or SIMD-intensive code benefits from AMD’s Zen 5 design. The consistent 8% multi-core advantage across Cinebench and PassMark multithread tests means heavily threaded rendering or compilation workloads will complete faster on the AMD part despite having 16 fewer cores.

A curious pattern emerges: AMD wins the tests that appear most dependent on clock speed and per-core efficiency, while Intel wins the tests that seem to reward memory bandwidth or cache hierarchy. The Xeon’s base clock is 2.10 GHz versus 3.85 GHz for AMD, and boost clocks are 3.80 GHz versus 4.80 GHz, the AMD part runs substantially faster per core, yet Intel still manages to win several throughput-heavy tests.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. Intel’s Xeon 6740P uses Granite Rapids architecture on a 5 nm process fabricated by Intel, with a die size of 2x 598 mm². AMD’s EPYC 9375F employs Zen 5 (Turin) architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, using a chiplet design of 8x 70.6 mm² dies. The transistor counts tell a story of density: AMD packs 66,520 million transistors across its chiplets, while Intel’s transistor count is not listed.

Core configurations diverge sharply. The Intel part has 48 cores and 96 threads, while AMD offers 32 cores and 64 threads. Cache hierarchies also differ: Intel uses 112 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 288 MB shared L3. AMD uses 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 256 MB shared L3. Intel’s larger per-core L1 and L2 caches may explain its floating point and encryption advantages, while AMD’s higher clock speeds compensate for smaller caches.

Memory subsystems present another key divide. Intel supports DDR5 with an eight-channel bus and 409.6 GB/s bandwidth. AMD supports DDR5 with a twelve-channel bus and 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, a 40% bandwidth advantage that likely contributes to AMD’s multi-core performance despite fewer cores. PCIe lanes also favor AMD: 128 Gen 5 lanes versus Intel’s 88 Gen 5 lanes, which matters for systems with many GPUs or NVMe drives.

Sockets and platforms are incompatible: Intel uses Socket 4710, AMD uses Socket SP5. Both support ECC memory, neither has integrated graphics, and both are locked multipliers. Production status is active for both. The release dates differ by roughly four months, with AMD launching on 2024-10-09 and Intel on 2025-02-23.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Xeon 6740P has 48 cores and 96 threads, while the AMD EPYC 9375F has 32 cores and 64 threads. Intel offers 50% more cores and threads.

Q: Why does AMD win multi-core Cinebench tests despite having fewer cores?

A: The AMD EPYC 9375F’s higher clock speeds (3.85 GHz base, 4.80 GHz boost versus 2.10 GHz and 3.80 GHz) and larger memory bandwidth (576.0 GB/s versus 409.6 GB/s) compensate for the core deficit, yielding an 8% multi-core advantage in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23.

Q: Where does Intel have its largest benchmark advantage?

A: Intel’s biggest win is in floating point math, scoring 296102 versus 260392 for AMD, a 13.7% margin. Data encryption follows at 11.4% ahead (82028 versus 73634).

Q: How large is the single-thread performance gap?

A: The AMD EPYC 9375F leads by 20.9% in PassMark single-thread (3762 versus 2975) and by 8% in Cinebench R15 single-core (1158 versus 1065).

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: AMD supports 576.0 GB/s via twelve DDR5 channels. Intel supports 409.6 GB/s via eight DDR5 channels. AMD’s bandwidth is roughly 40% higher.

Q: Do these processors use the same socket?

A: No. Intel uses Socket 4710, while AMD uses Socket SP5. They are not interchangeable.

The Verdict

The data suggests two distinct buyer profiles. The AMD EPYC 9375F is the stronger choice for workloads that emphasize per-core speed, algorithmic efficiency, and memory bandwidth. Its 41.2% lead in prime number finding and 20.9% lead in single-thread performance indicate that software which responds to raw clock speed and instruction efficiency will see the biggest gains. The 8% multi-core advantage across Cinebench and PassMark multithread tests, combined with 128 PCIe lanes and 576.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, makes it attractive for dense compute clusters and memory-heavy applications.

The Intel Xeon 6740P appeals to workloads that benefit from more cores and a larger cache hierarchy. Its 288 MB shared L3 versus AMD’s 256 MB, along with larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, likely explains wins in floating point math (13.7%), data encryption (11.4%), and random string sorting (8.6%). The 48-core configuration provides more parallel throughput capacity, which may matter for highly threaded server workloads that scale linearly with core count.

Neither processor dominates outright. Intel wins 6 benchmark categories, AMD wins 10. The average benchmark scores tell a nuanced story: Intel’s average is 176227, while AMD’s is 162497, yet both hold the 98th percentile among all CPUs. Intel’s nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7763 at -2.1% and Threadripper PRO 9975WX at -3.5%, while AMD’s rivals include the EPYC 9355P at 1.3% and the Xeon 676X at 2.5%. The choice hinges on whether the workload favors Intel’s cache and core-count advantages or AMD’s clock speed and bandwidth advantages.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon 6740P | AMD EPYC 9375F |

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

| Cores | 48 | 32 |

| Threads | 96 | 64 |

| Base Clock | 2.10 GHz | 3.85 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.80 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 270 W | 320 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 4710 | AMD Socket SP5 |

| Architecture | Granite Rapids | Zen 5 |

| Codename | Granite Rapids | Turin |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 4 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

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

| Transistors | Not listed | 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 | Gen 5, 128 Lanes |

| Release Date | 2025-02-23 | 2024-10-09 |

| Launch MSRP | $4650 | $5306 |

| Part Number | SRV5R | 100-000001197 |