AMD EPYC 9474F vs Intel Xeon D-2752TER Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the Intel Xeon D-2752TER and the AMD EPYC 9474F is decisively one-sided. In all six recorded Cinebench tests, the AMD EPYC 9474F takes the win, and the margins are enormous. The data shows that this is not a close contest at any level, whether single-threaded or fully loaded.

Starting with single-core performance in Cinebench R23, the EPYC 9474F scores 12,252 points against the Xeon D-2752TER’s 2,288. That puts the AMD part ahead by roughly 81.3 percent. The same pattern holds in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the EPYC scores 5,145 versus 960 for the Intel chip, again a gap of about 81.3 percent. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the EPYC posts 1,234 against 230, which is an 81.4 percent lead. These deltas are consistent across all three Cinebench versions, indicating that the per-core advantage of the Zen 4 architecture is substantial and does not depend on the benchmark generation.

The multi-core results are even more lopsided, as expected given the core count disparity. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 9474F delivers 86,790 points, while the Xeon D-2752TER manages 16,212. That is an 81.3 percent deficit for the Intel part. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows the EPYC at 36,451 versus 6,809 for the Xeon, again an 81.3 percent gap. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC scores 8,748 against 1,634, a similar 81.3 percent difference. The consistency of this delta across every test is striking; it suggests a near-uniform scaling factor between the two processors in Cinebench workloads.

It is notably the Intel Xeon D-2752TER does have some benchmark presence beyond Cinebench. The database includes PassMark results for the Intel part, such as 227,763 in data compression, 13,097 in data encryption, 13,846 in extended instructions, and 60,881 in integer math. However, the head-to-head comparison table only includes Cinebench tests, and in all six of those, the AMD EPYC 9474F wins. The Intel chip records zero wins in the head-to-head set, while the AMD chip records six.

For context on where these parts sit in the broader landscape, the database lists the Intel Xeon D-2752TER with a 78th percentile ranking among all CPUs, and the AMD EPYC 9474F at the 77th percentile. Their average benchmark scores are close: 25,530 for the Intel part and 25,103 for the AMD part. The nearest rivals for the Intel chip include the AMD Ryzen 7 5700 (average score 25,517, a 0.1 percent difference) and the AMD Ryzen 5 6600H (25,550, a negative 0.1 percent difference). For the AMD EPYC 9474F, the nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS (25,147, negative 0.2 percent) and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H (25,201, negative 0.4 percent). These percentile and rival figures indicate that while the EPYC dominates the Xeon in Cinebench, the average score across all recorded benchmarks for both parts lands them in a similar overall tier relative to the rest of the CPU market.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies and process technologies. The Intel Xeon D-2752TER uses the Ice Lake-D architecture, built on Intel’s 10 nm process node. It has 12 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 1.80 GHz and a boost clock of 2.80 GHz. The AMD EPYC 9474F is based on Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Genoa, manufactured by TSMC on a 5 nm process. It packs 48 cores and 96 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. The process node difference alone, 10 nm versus 5 nm, explains a significant portion of the performance gap, as the smaller node allows for higher clock speeds and better power efficiency per transistor.

The cache hierarchies also differ sharply. The Intel Xeon D-2752TER has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD EPYC 9474F has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a massive 256 MB of shared L3 cache. That 256 MB L3 is 12.8 times larger than the Intel chip’s 20 MB. For workloads that rely on large working sets staying in cache, the EPYC has a clear structural advantage.

Memory support is another major differentiator. The Intel part supports DDR4 memory with a quad-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 85.3 GB/s. The AMD EPYC 9474F supports DDR5 memory with a twelve-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 460.8 GB/s. That is more than five times the memory bandwidth of the Intel chip. The EPYC also has a much wider PCIe implementation: 128 Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, compared to 32 Gen 4 lanes on the Xeon. Both support ECC memory, and neither includes integrated graphics. The AMD part uses a socket of SP5, while the Intel part is on BGA 2579, which means the Xeon is soldered while the EPYC is socketed.

The transistor count and die size also reflect the scale difference. The AMD EPYC 9474F lists 52,560 million transistors across 8 dies, each 72 mm². The Intel Xeon D-2752TER has no recorded transistor count or die size in the database. The EPYC is a chiplet-based design, as indicated by the 8x 72 mm² die configuration, while the Xeon is a monolithic Ice Lake-D design. The EPYC also belongs to the EPYC 9004 series, a generation that targets high-end server workloads, whereas the Xeon D series is aimed at density-optimized edge and storage systems.

Where Each One Wins

Given the head-to-head results, the AMD EPYC 9474F wins in every measured Cinebench category. That makes it the clear choice for compute-heavy server workloads where multi-threaded rendering, simulation, or video encoding is the primary task. The single-core wins are equally important; they indicate that even lightly threaded applications, such as database query processing or certain scientific calculations, will run noticeably faster on the EPYC. The 81.3 percent lead in single-core R23 translates to roughly 5.4 times the single-thread performance of the Intel part. For any workload where latency per thread matters, the EPYC has a commanding advantage.

The Intel Xeon D-2752TER, despite losing all head-to-head tests, does have a role. Its 77 W TDP is dramatically lower than the EPYC’s 360 W TDP. That makes it suitable for power-constrained environments such as network edge devices, storage appliances, or compact server platforms where cooling and power delivery are limited. The Xeon also supports DDR4 memory, which can be an advantage in systems where DDR5 availability or cost is a concern, though the database does not include pricing for memory. The Xeon’s 32 PCIe Gen 4 lanes are sufficient for many I/O-heavy applications, and its 20 MB L3 cache, while small compared to the EPYC, is still adequate for moderate workloads.

The data also shows that the Intel part has a strong PassMark profile in specific tests. For example, its data compression score of 227,763 and integer math score of 60,881 suggest that it can handle certain data processing tasks competently. The random string sorting score of 31,802 and floating point math of 33,533 are also respectable for a 12-core part. However, none of these PassMark scores are compared directly to the EPYC in the head-to-head table, so they cannot be used to claim a win for the Intel chip.

In practice, the use case split is clear. The AMD EPYC 9474F is for heavy lifting: large virtualization hosts, database servers, high-performance computing nodes, and any environment where raw compute throughput is the top priority. The Intel Xeon D-2752TER is for edge and embedded roles where power draw and physical footprint matter more than absolute performance. The 77 W TDP versus 360 W TDP is a five-fold difference in thermal design power, which directly impacts cooling requirements, chassis design, and operational cost over the system’s life.

Specification Differences

The most obvious specification difference is core count: the EPYC 9474F has 48 cores and 96 threads, while the Xeon D-2752TER has 12 cores and 24 threads. That is a 4x difference in both cores and threads. Clock speeds also favor the AMD part, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz versus 1.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz versus 2.80 GHz. The EPYC runs at much higher frequencies despite having four times the cores, which is a direct result of the 5 nm process versus 10 nm.

The TDP difference is 77 W for the Intel part versus 360 W for the AMD part. The socket types differ entirely: Intel BGA 2579 for the Xeon, AMD Socket SP5 for the EPYC. The memory support is DDR4 for Intel and DDR5 for AMD, with channel counts of quad-channel versus twelve-channel, and memory bandwidth of 85.3 GB/s versus 460.8 GB/s. PCIe is Gen 4 with 32 lanes for Intel, Gen 5 with 128 lanes for AMD. The L3 cache is 20 MB shared for Intel versus 256 MB shared for AMD. The L1 and L2 caches are slightly larger per core on the Intel side (80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 versus 64 KB and 1 MB on AMD), but the AMD part’s massive L3 dwarfs that advantage.

The process node is 10 nm for Intel and 5 nm for AMD, with the foundry being Intel for the former and TSMC for the latter. The transistor count and die size are only recorded for the AMD part: 52,560 million transistors across 8 dies of 72 mm² each. The release dates differ by about nine months: the Xeon D-2752TER was released on February 23, 2022, while the EPYC 9474F was released on November 9, 2022. The launch MSRP for the Intel part is $1061, and for the AMD part it is $6780, though the database does not provide any current pricing or value analysis.

Both parts have ECC memory support, neither has integrated graphics, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel part has a listed part number of SRLCNSRM27, while the AMD part is 100-100000788. The production status for both is listed as Active.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD EPYC 9474F scores 86,790 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Intel Xeon D-2752TER scores 16,212. The AMD part is ahead by 81.3 percent.

Q: How does single-core performance compare?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC 9474F scores 12,252 versus 2,288 for the Xeon D-2752TER, a gap of 81.3 percent. The same delta appears in R20 and R15 single-core tests.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Intel Xeon D-2752TER has a memory bandwidth of 85.3 GB/s with quad-channel DDR4 support, while the AMD EPYC 9474F has 460.8 GB/s with twelve-channel DDR5 support.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Xeon D-2752TER and the AMD EPYC 9474F have ECC memory support listed in the database.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The Intel Xeon D-2752TER has 12 cores and 24 threads. The AMD EPYC 9474F has 48 cores and 96 threads, which is four times the core count and four times the thread count.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD EPYC 9474F has a boost clock of 4.10 GHz, while the Intel Xeon D-2752TER has a boost clock of 2.80 GHz. The base clocks are 3.60 GHz for the EPYC and 1.80 GHz for the Xeon.