AMD EPYC 9535 vs Intel Xeon 6774P Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data splits these two 64-core server processors almost evenly, with the Intel Xeon 6774P taking 6 benchmark wins and the AMD EPYC 9535 taking 5. The differences, however, are not subtle. This is a matchup where workload character determines the victor more than raw core count.

The AMD EPYC 9535 dominates integer-heavy and encryption workloads. Its PassMark integer math score of 730281 crushes the Intel Xeon 6774P's 593440, a 23.1% advantage. That is the single largest win for AMD in this comparison. Data encryption shows a similar story: the EPYC 9535 scores 127372 against Intel's 115025, a 10.7% lead. If your database queries, financial calculations, or compression tasks rely on integer arithmetic, the AMD part has a clear edge.

Single-thread performance also favors AMD decisively. The EPYC 9535 posts a PassMark single-thread score of 3720, which is 22.1% higher than the Xeon 6774P's 3047. This gap matters for lightly threaded workloads, legacy applications, or any service that cannot scale across all 128 threads. The multithread aggregate score also goes to AMD, 114528 versus 112749, a modest 1.6% lead despite the Xeon's higher base clock.

The Intel Xeon 6774P fights back in several specialized tests. The most dramatic difference is in PassMark physics: Intel scores 16023, while AMD manages only 3834. That is a 76.1% deficit for the EPYC 9535. This is not a typical server benchmark, but it indicates a massive gap in the specific instruction patterns used by physics simulation code. Prime number finding also heavily favors Intel: 1264 versus 874, a 30.9% lead. This workload often stresses branch prediction and integer division, areas where Granite Rapids appears stronger.

Data compression is nearly a tie. Intel scores 2309868 versus AMD's 2308822, a delta of 0%. Both processors effectively match in this throughput test. Extended instructions go to Intel by a slim margin, 177273 versus 175784, a 0.8% difference. Floating point math also favors Intel, 465314 versus 457047, a 1.8% lead. Random string sorting goes to Intel as well: 262417 versus 247506, a 5.7% advantage.

The pattern is clear. AMD wins on integer throughput, encryption, and single-core speed. Intel wins on physics, prime numbers, floating point, and string sorting. The average benchmark score tells a similar story: AMD's 379408 sits above Intel's 300372, but that aggregate masks the workload-specific swings. The EPYC 9535 ranks at the 100th percentile among all CPUs, while the Xeon 6774P sits at the 99th percentile.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher single-thread performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 9535 scores 3720 in PassMark single-thread tests, which is 22.1% higher than the Intel Xeon 6774P's 3047. This is one of AMD's largest wins in the head-to-head data.

Q: Is the Intel Xeon 6774P better at any compute-heavy task?

A: Yes. The Xeon 6774P wins PassMark physics by a massive 76.1% margin (16023 versus 3834) and prime number finding by 30.9% (1264 versus 874). It also edges out AMD in floating point math and random string sorting.

Q: How do the two compare in data encryption?

A: The AMD EPYC 9535 scores 127372 in PassMark data encryption, which is 10.7% ahead of the Intel Xeon 6774P's 115025. AMD also leads in integer math by 23.1%.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory configuration?

A: No. The AMD EPYC 9535 uses a twelve-channel DDR5 memory bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Xeon 6774P uses an eight-channel DDR5 bus with 409.6 GB/s. Both support ECC memory.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each?

A: Both processors have 64 cores and 128 threads. The AMD EPYC 9535 runs at a base clock of 2.40 GHz with a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The Intel Xeon 6774P runs at 2.50 GHz base with 3.90 GHz boost.

Q: How close is the overall multithread performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 9535 scores 114528 in PassMark multithread, which is 1.6% higher than the Intel Xeon 6774P's 112749. Despite the Xeon's higher base clock, AMD retains a slight lead in the aggregate multithread test.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 9535 is the pick for integer-heavy server workloads. The 23.1% lead in integer math and the 10.7% lead in encryption point toward database transaction processing, financial modeling, compression pipelines, and any application that spends most of its time on arithmetic operations. The 22.1% single-thread advantage also makes it the better choice for mixed workloads where some threads cannot scale across the full core count. The 1.6% multithread win reinforces that AMD holds the overall throughput crown in this pairing.

The Intel Xeon 6774P wins where specialized math or physics simulation matters. The 76.1% physics score gap is enormous and cannot be ignored if your software uses those instruction patterns. The 30.9% prime number advantage suggests strong performance in cryptography-related or number-theoretic workloads. The floating point lead of 1.8%, while small, combines with the 5.7% random string sorting win to make Intel a solid choice for data analysis, scientific computing, and text processing.

For data compression, the 0% delta means either processor delivers identical throughput. That is a rare tie in server CPUs and tells you to look elsewhere for differentiation. The Intel Xeon 6774P also wins the extended instructions test by 0.8%, which is within noise, so consider that workload a wash as well.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications beyond their benchmark scores. The AMD EPYC 9535 has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The Intel Xeon 6774P runs higher at base, 2.50 GHz, but boosts lower at 3.90 GHz. The thermal design power also differs: AMD is rated at 300 watts, Intel at 350 watts.

Memory architecture is a major divergence. The AMD EPYC 9535 supports twelve-channel DDR5 with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Xeon 6774P uses eight-channel DDR5 with 409.6 GB/s. Both support ECC, but AMD offers 40.6% more memory bandwidth, which can matter in memory-bound database and analytics workloads.

PCIe lane counts differ as well. The AMD EPYC 9535 provides Gen 5 with 128 lanes from the CPU. The Intel Xeon 6774P provides Gen 5 with 136 lanes, an 8-lane advantage. Neither has integrated graphics.

The launch MSRP for the AMD EPYC 9535 is $8992. The Intel Xeon 6774P has a launch MSRP of $6760. Both processors are currently marked as Active in production status.

Architecture Differences

The AMD EPYC 9535 is built on the Zen 5 architecture with the codename Turin, part of the EPYC 9005 series. It uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, with 66,520 million transistors spread across 8 chiplets, each 70.6 mm². The Intel Xeon 6774P uses the Granite Rapids architecture, part of the Xeon 6 family, built on Intel's 5 nm process with 2 dies measuring 598 mm² each. Intel does not report a transistor count in the database.

Cache layouts differ substantially. The AMD EPYC 9535 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 256 MB of shared L3. The Intel Xeon 6774P has more L1 at 112 KB per core, double the L2 at 2 MB per core, and a larger 336 MB of shared L3. The Xeon has 31.3% more L3 cache, which helps explain its wins in physics and prime number workloads that benefit from larger working sets.

The sockets are incompatible. AMD uses Socket SP5, while Intel uses Socket 4710. The AMD part is unlocked for multiplier adjustment, while the Intel part is not. Both target the server and workstation market segment.

The release dates differ by about seven months. The AMD EPYC 9535 launched on 2024-10-09, while the Intel Xeon 6774P launched on 2025-05-21. The AMD part number is 100-000001147, and the Intel part number is SRWPC.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear workload split. If your applications are dominated by integer math, encryption, or single-threaded tasks, the AMD EPYC 9535 is the stronger choice. Its 23.1% integer math lead and 10.7% encryption lead are decisive, and the 22.1% single-thread advantage means it will feel faster even in poorly scaled software. The 1.6% multithread win confirms that AMD holds the overall throughput edge in general-purpose server work.

If your workloads involve physics simulation, prime number calculation, or floating-point-heavy scientific code, the Intel Xeon 6774P is the better fit. The 76.1% physics score gap is the largest single difference in this comparison, and the 30.9% prime number win is substantial. The larger 336 MB L3 cache and 2 MB per core L2 support these specialized workloads. The 5.7% random string sorting advantage also makes Intel the pick for text-heavy data processing.

For memory bandwidth-sensitive applications, the AMD EPYC 9535 has a clear architectural edge with twelve-channel DDR5 at 576.0 GB/s versus Intel's eight-channel 409.6 GB/s. That 40.6% bandwidth advantage should translate to better performance in analytics, virtualization, and large in-memory databases, even if the aggregate benchmark scores do not always show it.

The Intel Xeon 6774P does offer more PCIe lanes at 136 versus 128, which matters for systems with many GPUs or NVMe drives. Its lower launch MSRP of $6760 versus $8992 is also recorded in the database, though the performance gap in AMD's favor may justify the higher price for some buyers. Both processors are active and available. The decision comes down to whether your software favors AMD's integer and encryption strengths or Intel's specialized math and cache-heavy wins. Choose AMD for general server throughput and single-thread responsiveness. Choose Intel for physics, prime, and floating-point-dominated workloads.