AMD EPYC 9455P vs Intel Xeon w9-3595X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive overall victory for the AMD EPYC 9455P, which wins 14 of the 16 head-to-head comparisons, with the Intel Xeon w9-3595X taking only two. The most dramatic gap appears in the Cinebench suite, where the AMD part is consistently 17.7% ahead across R15, R20, and R23, in both single-core and multi-core tests. For context, the AMD EPYC 9455P scores 99,206 in Cinebench R23 multi-core versus 84,304 for the Intel, and 14,005 versus 14,005 in single-core R23—wait, the single-core scores are 14,005 for AMD and no single-core R23 is listed for Intel in the head-to-head, so the 17.7% delta applies to R23 multi-core only. The R23 single-core score for AMD is 14,005, but Intel’s R23 single-core is not provided in the head-to-head table, so we rely on the R15 and R20 single-core deltas of 17.7% each.

The single-core advantage is consistent but modest in absolute terms: in PassMark single-thread, the AMD wins by just 0.7% (3745 vs 3720). However, in multi-threaded PassMark, the AMD leads by 17.4% (116,927 vs 99,576). The largest single delta is in PassMark physics, where the AMD EPYC 9455P scores 17,315 versus the Intel’s 5,842—a 196.4% advantage. This is a massive outlier, suggesting a fundamental difference in how the two processors handle physics simulation workloads. Similarly, in PassMark find prime numbers, the AMD wins by 90.9% (1107 vs 580), and in integer math, by 28% (606,239 vs 473,507). Data encryption also favors AMD heavily at 25.1% (115,403 vs 92,249).

The Intel Xeon w9-3595X does strike back in two areas. It wins PassMark extended instructions by 3.7% (142,785 vs 137,485) and floating-point math by 5.6% (379,008 vs 357,783). These wins are narrow but meaningful for workloads that rely heavily on SIMD or FP arithmetic. In data compression, the AMD leads but only by 5.3% (1,928,897 vs 1,831,962), and in random string sorting by 27.2% (242,701 vs 190,745). Overall, the AMD EPYC 9455P’s average benchmark score is 217,854 versus 209,881 for the Intel, giving the AMD a 3.8% lead in the aggregate. The Intel sits in the 99th percentile of all CPUs, as does the AMD, but the AMD’s nearest rival list shows it is 8.6% behind the Intel Xeon 6747P and 11.8% ahead of the Intel Xeon 6741P, while the Intel w9-3595X is 7.7% ahead of the 6741P and 8.5% ahead of the Intel Xeon 678X.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmarks?

A: The AMD EPYC 9455P wins 14 of 16 head-to-head tests, with the Intel Xeon w9-3595X winning only two (PassMark extended instructions and floating-point math).

Q: How large is the AMD’s lead in Cinebench multi-core?

A: The AMD EPYC 9455P is 17.7% ahead in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests, scoring 9,999, 41,666, and 99,206 respectively, versus Intel’s 8,497, 35,407, and 84,304.

Q: Is the Intel Xeon w9-3595X faster in any single-threaded test?

A: No. The AMD wins single-core in R15 by 17.7% (1411 vs 1199) and in R20 by 17.7% (5882 vs 4998). In PassMark single-thread, the AMD wins by just 0.7% (3745 vs 3720).

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest delta is in PassMark physics, where the AMD EPYC 9455P is 196.4% faster (17,315 vs 5,842). The next largest is PassMark find prime numbers, with AMD ahead by 90.9% (1107 vs 580).

Q: Does the Intel win any benchmark by a large margin?

A: No. The Intel’s largest win is 5.6% in floating-point math (379,008 vs 357,783), and its other win is 3.7% in extended instructions (142,785 vs 137,485).

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD EPYC 9455P has an average score of 217,854, which is 3.8% higher than the Intel’s 209,881, according to the nearestRivals data.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD EPYC 9455P is built on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Turin, and is part of the EPYC 9005 series. It uses a 4 nm process node fabricated by TSMC, with a die composed of 8x 70.6 mm² chiplets, totaling 66,520 million transistors. In contrast, the Intel Xeon w9-3595X is based on the Sapphire Rapids codename, part of the Xeon W generation, and uses a 10 nm process node from Intel, with a die size of 4x 477 mm². The Intel chip does not list a transistor count in the fact pack.

The cache hierarchies differ significantly. The AMD has 256 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel has 112.5 MB of L3. Both have 80 KB of L1 per core, but the AMD has 1 MB of L2 per core, whereas the Intel has 2 MB per core. This means the Intel has more L2 cache per core, but the AMD has a much larger L3 pool. The AMD’s memory bus is twelve-channel, while the Intel’s is eight-channel, which likely contributes to the AMD’s higher memory bandwidth.

The memory bandwidth figures are stark: the AMD EPYC 9455P offers 576.0 GB/s, while the Intel Xeon w9-3595X offers 307.2 GB/s. Both support DDR5 and ECC memory. In terms of PCIe, the AMD provides Gen 5 with 128 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel provides Gen 5 with 112 lanes (CPU only). The AMD has no integrated graphics, and the Intel also lists N/A for integrated graphics.

The sockets are incompatible: the AMD uses AMD Socket SP5, and the Intel uses Intel Socket 4677. The AMD’s multiplier is locked, while the Intel’s multiplier is unlocked, allowing overclocking on the Intel. The production status for both is Active. The AMD was released on 2024-10-09, and the Intel on 2024-08-23. The AMD’s part number is 100-000001563, and the Intel’s is SRN71.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The AMD EPYC 9455P has 48 cores and 96 threads, while the Intel Xeon w9-3595X has 60 cores and 120 threads. The AMD’s base clock is 3.15 GHz, and its boost clock is 4.40 GHz. The Intel’s base clock is 2.00 GHz, and its boost clock is 4.80 GHz. The TDP also differs: the AMD is rated at 300 watts, while the Intel is rated at 385 watts.

The process node is a major difference: the AMD uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel uses a 10 nm process from Intel. The die size is also different: the AMD has 8x 70.6 mm² chiplets, and the Intel has 4x 477 mm². The transistor count for the AMD is 66,520 million, while the Intel’s is not listed.

Cache sizes differ as noted: the AMD has 1 MB L2 per core and 256 MB shared L3, while the Intel has 2 MB L2 per core and 112.5 MB L3. The memory bus is twelve-channel for AMD and eight-channel for Intel, with memory bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s versus 307.2 GB/s. PCIe lanes are 128 for AMD and 112 for Intel, both Gen 5.

The socket is different (SP5 vs 4677), and the multiplier is locked on AMD but unlocked on Intel. The launch MSRP is $4819 for the AMD and $5889 for the Intel. The release dates are 2024-10-09 for AMD and 2024-08-23 for Intel. The Intel has a higher core count, higher boost clock, and more L2 per core, but the AMD has a smaller process node, much larger L3, more memory bandwidth, and more PCIe lanes.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD EPYC 9455P as the stronger performer overall, with a 3.8% higher average benchmark score (217,854 vs 209,881) and a 14-2 win count in head-to-head tests. The AMD’s advantages are most pronounced in multi-threaded and integer-heavy workloads, where it leads by double-digit percentages in most cases. The Intel Xeon w9-3595X, despite having 12 more cores and 24 more threads, loses in multi-core Cinebench by 17.7% and in PassMark multithread by 17.4%. This suggests the AMD’s Zen 5 architecture and much larger L3 cache (256 MB vs 112.5 MB) more than compensate for the core deficit.

The Intel does win in floating-point math and extended instructions, which could make it preferable for specific scientific or SIMD-heavy applications. However, the magnitude of those wins (5.6% and 3.7%) is small compared to the AMD’s wins in physics (196.4%) and prime numbers (90.9%). The Intel also has an unlocked multiplier, which allows overclocking, but that is not reflected in the benchmark scores provided.

Given the launch MSRP of $4819 for the AMD and $5889 for the Intel, the AMD offers a higher average score at a lower launch MSRP. The AMD’s lower TDP (300 vs 385 watts) also suggests better efficiency per watt, though this is not directly benchmarked here. For a workstation buyer, the choice depends on workload: the AMD is the clear winner for general multi-threading, encryption, integer math, and physics, while the Intel holds a narrower edge in floating-point and extended instruction workloads, plus the overclocking headroom.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 9455P is the choice for workloads that stress multi-core integer performance, data encryption, and physics simulation. The 196.4% lead in PassMark physics is extraordinary, making the AMD the obvious pick for any simulation or physics-based rendering task. The 90.9% advantage in find prime numbers indicates a strong performance in number-crunching and cryptographic-style operations. Data encryption is also a clear AMD win at 25.1%, and integer math at 28% suggests the AMD is better suited for general-purpose computation, database workloads, and compilation tasks. The AMD also wins in random string sorting by 27.2%, which is relevant for data processing and sorting algorithms.

The Intel Xeon w9-3595X wins in floating-point math by 5.6% and extended instructions by 3.7%. These are the only two benchmarks where Intel prevails, so the Intel is the recommendation for workloads that rely heavily on FP arithmetic, such as certain scientific computing, financial modeling, or 3D rendering that uses FP-heavy code paths. The extended instructions win suggests the Intel may have an edge in AVX-512 or similar SIMD-heavy workloads, though the data does not specify which instruction set is used. The Intel’s 60 cores and 120 threads, combined with a higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz, may also help in lightly threaded workloads that can hit that boost, but the single-thread PassMark shows the AMD is slightly faster (0.7%).

For mixed workloads, the AMD wins the aggregate average score by 3.8%, so it is the safer default choice. The Intel’s unlocked multiplier is a wildcard—if the user plans to overclock, the Intel could potentially close some gaps, but the fact pack does not provide overclocked benchmark data. In summary, the AMD EPYC 9455P is the superior processor for most server and workstation tasks, while the Intel Xeon w9-3595X is a niche pick for FP-heavy or SIMD-heavy applications where its modest wins matter more than the AMD’s broad dominance.