AMD EPYC 9375F vs Intel Xeon 6745P Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster overall based on the benchmark data?

A: The AMD EPYC 9375F wins 15 of the 16 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with an average benchmark score of 162,497 versus 154,858 for the Intel Xeon 6745P. The AMD part sits in the 98th percentile of all CPUs, and so does the Intel part, but the AMD's nearest rival list shows it leading the Intel Xeon 676X by 2.5%, while the Intel trails that same Xeon 676X by 2.3%.

Q: How much of a lead does the AMD EPYC 9375F have in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The AMD EPYC 9375F leads by 13.7% in Cinebench R23 multi-core (81,402 vs. 71,578) and by the same 13.7% margin in PassMark multithread (95,768 vs. 84,210). The Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core tests also show a consistent 13.7% advantage for the AMD chip.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon 6745P win any benchmark at all?

A: Yes, exactly one. The Intel Xeon 6745P wins PassMark floating point math by 2.6% (267,438 vs. 260,392). This is the sole benchmark victory for the Intel processor across all 16 head-to-head tests.

Q: What is the biggest single benchmark margin between the two?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the AMD EPYC 9375F scores 1,397 versus 681 for the Intel Xeon 6745P, a massive 105.1% advantage. This indicates a very large performance difference in this specific integer workload.

Q: Are these processors in the same performance class?

A: Both are positioned in the 98th percentile of all CPUs, but the average benchmark scores differ by 4.7% (162,497 for AMD vs. 154,858 for Intel). The AMD EPYC 9375F is 4.7% ahead of the Intel Xeon 6745P in average score, and the Intel's nearest rival list confirms that 4.7% gap as the delta to the AMD part.

Q: Which processor has higher clock speeds?

A: The AMD EPYC 9375F has a base clock of 3.85 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Intel Xeon 6745P has a base clock of 3.10 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The AMD part is higher in both metrics.

Architecture Differences

The AMD EPYC 9375F is built on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Turin, and belongs to the EPYC 9005 series. It is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a transistor count of 66,520 million spread across 8 dies, each measuring 70.6 mm². The Intel Xeon 6745P uses the Granite Rapids architecture, part of the Xeon 6 family (Granite Rapids-SP), and is built on a 5 nm process at Intel with a die size of 2x 598 mm².

Cache hierarchies differ substantially between the two. The AMD part provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 256 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part offers more per-core cache with 112 KB L1 per core and 2 MB L2 per core, plus a larger 336 MB shared L3. Despite Intel's larger total cache pool, the AMD chip wins the majority of cache-sensitive workloads in the benchmark data.

Memory architecture is another clear differentiator. The AMD EPYC 9375F supports twelve-channel DDR5 memory with a peak bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s. The Intel Xeon 6745P supports eight-channel DDR5 with a peak bandwidth of 409.6 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. The AMD part also offers 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part provides 88 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only).

The AMD part uses AMD Socket SP5, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 4710. Neither processor includes integrated graphics, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD EPYC 9375F was released on 2024-10-09, while the Intel Xeon 6745P came later on 2025-02-23.

The Verdict

The data points to a decisive win for the AMD EPYC 9375F in nearly every measurable category. With 15 wins out of 16 head-to-head benchmarks, the AMD chip is the clear performance leader. The average benchmark score difference of 4.7% (162,497 vs. 154,858) understates the dominance, because the Intel part's only victory is a narrow 2.6% margin in floating point math, while the AMD part wins many tests by double-digit margins.

For workloads that are heavily multi-threaded, the AMD EPYC 9375F is the obvious choice. The consistent 13.7% advantage across all three Cinebench multi-core tests (R15, R20, R23) and the PassMark multithread test shows a stable and substantial performance edge. The AMD part also excels in integer-heavy tasks, with a 105.1% lead in find prime numbers and a 15.1% lead in integer math.

The Intel Xeon 6745P is only preferable in floating point math, where it holds a 2.6% advantage. For any other workload represented in this benchmark suite, the AMD EPYC 9375F delivers higher scores. The Intel part's larger L3 cache (336 MB vs. 256 MB) does not translate into benchmark wins, and its lower clock speeds (3.10 GHz base vs. 3.85 GHz, 4.30 GHz boost vs. 4.80 GHz) likely contribute to its performance deficit.

Buyers who prioritize raw floating point throughput might consider the Intel part, but the margin is small and confined to a single test. For general server and workstation workloads, the AMD EPYC 9375F is the superior processor according to this data.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 9375F | Intel Xeon 6745P |

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

| Base clock | 3.85 GHz | 3.10 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.80 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| TDP | 320 W | 300 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP5 | Intel Socket 4710 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Granite Rapids |

| Process node | 4 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 66,520 million | Not specified |

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

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

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

| L3 cache | 256 MB (shared) | 336 MB (shared) |

| Memory bus | Twelve-channel | Eight-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 576.0 GB/s | 409.6 GB/s |

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

| Launch MSRP | $5306 | $5250 |

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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD EPYC 9375F dominates the Cinebench suite with exact consistency. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD scores 8,205 against Intel's 7,214, a 13.7% advantage. The single-core R15 test shows 1,158 vs. 1,018, also a 13.8% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core delivers 34,188 vs. 30,062 (13.7% ahead), and R20 single-core gives 4,826 vs. 4,244 (13.7% ahead). Cinebench R23 multi-core rounds out the Cinebench results with 81,402 vs. 71,578, again a 13.7% margin.

The PassMark suite shows a broader spread of results. The AMD chip wins data compression by 10.6% (1,496,149 vs. 1,352,801) and data encryption by 10.5% (73,634 vs. 66,665). Extended instructions favor AMD by 18.4% (128,296 vs. 108,326). The largest margin is in find prime numbers, where AMD scores 1,397 versus Intel's 681, a 105.1% blowout. Integer math goes to AMD by 15.1% (387,901 vs. 336,926). Multithread performance shows AMD ahead by 13.7% (95,768 vs. 84,210). Physics tests reveal a 46.8% AMD advantage (9,019 vs. 6,144). Random string sorting favors AMD by 20.6% (161,091 vs. 133,528). Single-thread tests show AMD ahead by 9% (3,762 vs. 3,450).

The Intel Xeon 6745P's sole win is in floating point math, scoring 267,438 against AMD's 260,392, a 2.6% margin. This is a narrow victory and the only instance where the Intel part outperforms the AMD part in the entire benchmark set.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 9375F wins in every category except one. For multi-threaded rendering and content creation workloads, the Cinebench results (13.7% ahead in all three multi-core tests) make it the clear choice. For integer-heavy tasks such as prime number calculation (105.1% ahead) and integer math (15.1% ahead), the AMD chip is dramatically superior. Data compression and encryption workloads also favor AMD by roughly 10.5-10.6%.

The AMD part also wins in physics simulations (46.8% ahead), extended instruction sets (18.4% ahead), and random string sorting (20.6% ahead). Single-thread performance favors AMD by 9%, which is significant for lightly threaded applications.

The Intel Xeon 6745P wins only in floating point math, with a 2.6% advantage. This makes it marginally better for workloads that are heavily dependent on floating point calculations, such as certain scientific simulations or financial modeling. However, the margin is small, and the AMD part is competitive even in this area.

For general server workloads, the AMD EPYC 9375F is the better choice across almost all benchmark categories. The Intel part's 20 W lower TDP (300 W vs. 320 W) is its only other advantage, but that does not translate into performance wins in this data. The AMD part's higher memory bandwidth (576.0 GB/s vs. 409.6 GB/s) and more PCIe lanes (128 vs. 88) reinforce its position for memory and I/O intensive applications.