CPU Comparison

The benchmark data presents a clear and dramatic split: the AMD EPYC 9455P dominates in rendering and general multi-threaded workloads, while the Intel Xeon 6980P counters with significant victories in specific server-side tasks like data compression, encryption, and extended instruction throughput. Despite having fewer cores, the EPYC 9455P consistently outperforms the Xeon 6980P across the Cinebench suite and PassMark's multithreaded test, with margins ranging from 36% to over 80%. However, the Xeon 6980P's advantages in other PassMark tests are equally pronounced, making the choice between these two processors entirely dependent on the target workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is in PassMark's physics test, where the AMD EPYC 9455P scores 17,315 compared to the Intel Xeon 6980P's 3,350. This represents an 80.7% advantage for AMD, the largest delta in the entire comparison. This massive gap suggests that the EPYC 9455P's architecture is fundamentally more efficient at handling the physics simulation workload, likely due to its higher clock speeds and per-core performance.

The Cinebench results reinforce this trend. Across R15, R20, and R23, the EPYC 9455P wins both single-core and multi-core tests by a consistent margin of approximately 36.3%. For instance, in Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 9455P scores 99,206 versus the Xeon 6980P's 63,175. This consistency across generations of the Cinebench test indicates a fundamental per-core performance advantage that scales directly to multi-threaded workloads. The PassMark multithread test tells a similar story, with the EPYC 9455P scoring 116,927 against 74,324 for the Xeon 6980P, a 36.4% difference.

The Intel Xeon 6980P, however, has its own set of decisive wins. In PassMark's extended instructions test, the Xeon 6980P scores 214,794, a 56.2% advantage over the EPYC 9455P's 137,485. This suggests the Xeon's architecture is particularly well-suited for vectorized and SIMD-heavy code. Similarly, in floating-point math, the Xeon 6980P leads with 501,720 points versus 357,783 for AMD, a 40.2% margin. Data compression is another Xeon stronghold, where it scores 2,364,519 compared to 1,928,897 for the EPYC 9455P, a 22.6% advantage.

The remaining tests are closer or favor AMD. In integer math, the Xeon 6980P wins narrowly with 637,476 points against 606,239, a 5.2% difference. Data encryption also goes to Intel, with 125,246 points versus 115,403, an 8.5% edge. AMD wins the random string sorting test by a hair, 242,701 to 240,792, a 0.8% margin. The single-threaded PassMark test heavily favors AMD, with the EPYC 9455P scoring 3,745 versus 1,681 for the Xeon 6980P, a 55.1% advantage. AMD also wins the prime number finding test with 1,107 points against 555 for Intel, a 49.9% difference. Overall, AMD wins 12 of the 17 head-to-head benchmarks, while Intel wins 5.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different designs. The Intel Xeon 6980P utilizes the Granite Rapids architecture, manufactured on Intel's 5 nm process node, and features a massive 128 cores and 256 threads. Its die is composed of three 598 mm² slices, totaling a substantial physical footprint. In contrast, the AMD EPYC 9455P is based on the Zen 5 architecture (codename Turin), fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm node, and packs 48 cores and 96 threads across eight 70.6 mm² chiplets. This chiplet design allows AMD to use a more advanced process, which is reflected in its higher clock speeds.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The Xeon 6980P provides 112 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2 per core, with a massive 504 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC 9455P has smaller per-core caches (80 KB L1 and 1 MB L2) but still offers a substantial 256 MB of shared L3 cache. The Xeon's larger L3 cache likely contributes to its wins in data-intensive workloads like compression and encryption.

Memory support is similar on paper, both support DDR5 with a twelve-channel memory bus, but the bandwidth figures differ. The Xeon 6980P boasts a theoretical memory bandwidth of 614.4 GB/s, while the EPYC 9455P is rated at 576.0 GB/s. This 38.4 GB/s advantage for Intel may explain its performance in memory-bound tasks. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Xeon 6980P provides 96 Gen 5 lanes, while the EPYC 9455P offers 128 Gen 5 lanes, giving AMD an advantage in systems with many high-speed expansion cards. Both processors support ECC memory and lack integrated graphics.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core, and by how much?

A: The AMD EPYC 9455P is faster, scoring 99,206 points versus the Intel Xeon 6980P's 63,175 points. This represents a 36.3% performance advantage for AMD.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon 6980P win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, the Xeon 6980P wins 5 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons. Its most significant victories are in PassMark's extended instructions test (56.2% ahead), floating-point math (40.2% ahead), and data compression (22.6% ahead).

Q: How do the core counts and clock speeds compare?

A: The Intel Xeon 6980P has 128 cores and 256 threads with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. The AMD EPYC 9455P has 48 cores and 96 threads, with a much higher base clock of 3.15 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz.

Q: Which processor offers more PCIe lanes?

A: The AMD EPYC 9455P provides 128 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel Xeon 6980P provides 96 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only). This gives AMD a 32-lane advantage.

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

A: The Intel Xeon 6980P has a higher rated memory bandwidth of 614.4 GB/s, compared to the AMD EPYC 9455P's 576.0 GB/s. Both use a twelve-channel DDR5 memory bus.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon 6980P | AMD EPYC 9455P |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Cores | 128 | 48 |

| Threads | 256 | 96 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 3.15 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.90 GHz | 4.40 GHz |

| TDP | 500 W | 300 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 7529 | AMD Socket SP5 |

| Architecture | Granite Rapids | Zen 5 |

| Process Node | 5 nm (Intel) | 4 nm (TSMC) |

| Die Size | 3x 598 mm² | 8x 70.6 mm² |

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

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

| L3 Cache | 504 MB (shared) | 256 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 614.4 GB/s | 576.0 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 96 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 128 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Launch MSRP | $12460 | $4819 |

The Verdict

The data paints a definitive picture: for general multi-threaded performance, rendering, and single-threaded tasks, the AMD EPYC 9455P is the superior processor. Its consistent 36% advantage across the Cinebench suite and the 55% lead in single-threaded PassMark tests demonstrate a per-core efficiency that the Xeon 6980P cannot match, despite its far higher core count. The EPYC 9455P also achieves this with a lower TDP of 300 W compared to the Xeon's 500 W, and it offers more PCIe lanes.

Conversely, the Intel Xeon 6980P is the specialist's choice for specific data-center tasks. Its wins in data compression, encryption, extended instructions, and floating-point math point to an architecture optimized for large-scale data manipulation and scientific computing. The Xeon's 504 MB of L3 cache and higher memory bandwidth likely fuel these victories. The Xeon 6980P also holds a 5.2% edge in integer math, making it relevant for general-purpose compute as well.

The choice is clear: if the workload is broad, diverse, or heavily reliant on multi-threading and clock speed, the AMD EPYC 9455P is the right pick. If the workload is dominated by data compression, encryption, or vectorized math, the Intel Xeon 6980P is the stronger option, albeit with a significantly higher launch MSRP of $12460 versus $4819.

Where Each One Wins

AMD EPYC 9455P Wins:

• 3D Rendering and Animation: The EPYC dominates all Cinebench multi-core tests, making it the clear choice for CPU-based rendering in applications like Cinema 4D.
• General Multi-Threaded Workloads: The PassMark multithread score is 36.4% higher than the Xeon, indicating a strong advantage for video transcoding, software compilation, and other parallel tasks.
• Simulation and Physics: The 80.7% lead in the PassMark physics test is the largest margin in the comparison, making the EPYC 9455P ideal for engineering simulation and scientific computing.
• Single-Threaded and Lightly-Threaded Tasks: The 55.1% advantage in single-threaded PassMark tests and its higher boost clock make it faster for database queries, web serving, and other latency-sensitive operations.
• Prime Number Finding: A 49.9% lead in this test suggests an advantage in cryptography and number-theoretic computations.

Intel Xeon 6980P Wins:

• Data Compression and Encryption: With 22.6% and 8.5% leads respectively, the Xeon 6980P is better suited for file servers, backup appliances, and VPN/encryption gateways.
• Vectorized and Extended Instruction Code: The 56.2% advantage in extended instructions makes it the stronger choice for scientific computing, financial modeling, and AI inferencing that rely on SIMD operations.
• Floating-Point Math: A 40.2% lead in this area reinforces its suitability for HPC and scientific workloads that require heavy FPU usage.
• Memory-Bound Large Datasets: The higher memory bandwidth and larger L3 cache suggest an edge in workloads with massive working sets that don't fit in smaller caches, such as in-memory analytics.