AMD EPYC 9555P vs Intel Xeon 6741P Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD EPYC 9555P is the dominant performer in this comparison, winning 16 of 17 head-to-head benchmark matchups against the Intel Xeon 6741P. The data shows a decisive edge across nearly every workload category, with the AMD part leading by double-digit percentages in most tests. For workloads that scale with core count, thread count, and memory bandwidth, the EPYC 9555P is the clear choice. The Intel Xeon 6741P wins exactly one benchmark, the PassMark find prime numbers test, where it leads by 14.1%. That single victory, however, does not offset the broad and consistent margin AMD holds elsewhere.

The database places both processors in the 99th percentile among all CPUs, so neither is a weak option. Still, the average benchmark score for the AMD EPYC 9555P is 287066, while the Intel Xeon 6741P averages 194901. That is a substantial gap of roughly 47% in average score. The AMD part also sits among faster rivals like the Intel Xeon 696X and AMD EPYC 9565, with deltas of only 0.3% and 0.6% respectively. The Intel part, by contrast, is closely matched with the AMD EPYC 9335 and Intel Xeon 678X, with deltas of 0.3% and 0.7%. So the Xeon 6741P is competitive within its own tier, but that tier is below the EPYC 9555P.

Who should pick which? If the workload is multi-threaded rendering, data compression, encryption, floating-point math, integer math, or any Cinebench test, the AMD EPYC 9555P is the stronger option. If the workload is specifically prime number calculation, the Intel Xeon 6741P has the edge. For general server workloads, the AMD part's higher core count, faster clocks, and wider memory bus make it the recommended choice. The Intel part is not a poor product, but the data does not support choosing it except for narrow use cases.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 9555P wins every Cinebench test, both single-core and multi-core, by a uniform 34.6% margin. That consistency suggests the advantage comes from architectural efficiency rather than a single feature. In PassMark tests, the AMD part wins data compression by 45.3%, data encryption by 65.9%, extended instructions by 33.9%, floating-point math by 35.7%, integer math by 71.8%, multithread by 22.8%, physics by 11.4%, random string sorting by 58.1%, and single-thread by 6.7%. These are broad wins across memory-intensive, compute-intensive, and encryption-heavy workloads.

The Intel Xeon 6741P wins only the PassMark find prime numbers test. The score is 1242 versus 1067 for the AMD part, a 14.1% lead. This is a niche result. Prime number calculation often depends on specific instruction efficiency and cache behavior, and the Intel part appears to have an advantage there. But it is the only bright spot in an otherwise one-sided comparison.

For single-thread performance, the AMD part leads by 6.7% in PassMark single-thread tests, with scores of 3410 versus 3195. That is a smaller margin than the multi-core wins, but still a win. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD part scores 16261 versus 12079, a 34.6% lead. So even in lightly threaded workloads, the AMD part is ahead.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better multi-core performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 9555P wins all multi-core Cinebench tests by 34.6%. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 115186 versus 85561 for the Intel Xeon 6741P. The PassMark multithread test also favors AMD, with a 22.8% lead.

Q: Is the Intel Xeon 6741P better at anything?

A: Yes, the Intel Xeon 6741P wins the PassMark find prime numbers test. It scores 1242 versus 1067 for the AMD part, a 14.1% advantage. No other benchmark in the recorded data shows an Intel win.

Q: How do the two compare in single-thread performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 9555P leads in single-thread tests. In PassMark single-thread, it scores 3410 versus 3195, a 6.7% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the lead is larger at 34.6%, with scores of 16261 versus 12079.

Q: What about memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD EPYC 9555P supports twelve-channel memory with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Xeon 6741P supports eight-channel memory with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD part has a structural advantage in memory throughput.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 9555P has 64 cores and 128 threads. The Intel Xeon 6741P has 48 cores and 96 threads. The AMD part has 16 more cores and 32 more threads.

Q: How close are these processors to their nearest rivals?

A: The AMD EPYC 9555P is within 0.3% of the Intel Xeon 696X and 0.6% of the AMD EPYC 9565. The Intel Xeon 6741P is within 0.3% of the AMD EPYC 9335 and 0.7% of the Intel Xeon 678X.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the AMD EPYC 9555P comes in PassMark integer math. The AMD part scores 787106 versus 458058 for Intel, a 71.8% lead. This is a massive gap and suggests the AMD architecture is far more efficient at integer operations. The second largest win is in data encryption, where AMD leads by 65.9%, scoring 148896 versus 89746. Encryption workloads often depend on instruction set support and parallel throughput, and the AMD part excels there.

Random string sorting shows a 58.1% lead for AMD, with scores of 280398 versus 177322. Data compression shows a 45.3% lead, with scores of 2639400 versus 1816408. These are memory and cache sensitive workloads, and the AMD part's larger L3 cache and higher memory bandwidth help. Floating-point math shows a 35.7% lead, with scores of 486407 versus 358423. Extended instructions show a 33.9% lead, with scores of 191082 versus 142682.

All Cinebench tests, both single-core and multi-core, show a uniform 34.6% lead for AMD. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the scores are 115186 versus 85561. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the scores are 16261 versus 12079. This uniformity across Cinebench versions suggests the AMD part has a consistent per-core advantage, not just a core count advantage.

The smallest AMD win is in PassMark single-thread, where the lead is 6.7%, with scores of 3410 versus 3195. Physics also shows a relatively small lead at 11.4%, with scores of 15474 versus 13890. Multithread shows a 22.8% lead, with scores of 123576 versus 100660.

The only Intel win is in PassMark find prime numbers, where Intel scores 1242 versus 1067 for AMD, a 14.1% lead. This is the sole counterpoint in the dataset. Every other recorded benchmark favors the AMD part.

Architecture Differences

The AMD EPYC 9555P uses the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Turin, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Xeon 6741P uses the Granite Rapids architecture, built on a 5 nm process at Intel. The process node difference gives AMD a potential efficiency and density advantage. The AMD part has 66,520 million transistors across 8 dies, each 70.6 mm². The Intel part has a die size of 2x 598 mm², which is a much larger physical implementation.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 256 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has 112 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 288 MB of shared L3 cache. Intel has more cache per core and more total L3, but AMD still wins most cache-sensitive benchmarks. This suggests AMD's cache hierarchy is more effective for the tested workloads.

Memory support also differs. Both support DDR5 and ECC memory. The AMD part uses a twelve-channel memory bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part uses an eight-channel memory bus with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD part has 40.6% more memory bandwidth, which likely contributes to its wins in data compression and random string sorting.

PCIe support differs as well. The AMD part provides Gen 5 with 128 lanes, CPU only. The Intel part provides Gen 5 with 136 lanes, CPU only. Intel offers 8 more lanes, which may matter for systems with many expansion cards, but the benchmark data does not show a performance advantage from this.

The sockets are different. The AMD part uses AMD Socket SP5, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 4710. This means platform choice is mutually exclusive. The AMD part is from the EPYC 9005 series, while the Intel part is from the Xeon 6 series with the Granite Rapids-SP generation.

Specification Differences

The core count differs: 64 cores for AMD versus 48 cores for Intel. Thread count follows: 128 versus 96. Base clock speeds differ: 3.20 GHz for AMD versus 2.50 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks differ: 4.40 GHz for AMD versus 3.80 GHz for Intel. The AMD part has higher clocks at both ends.

Thermal design power differs: 360 watts for AMD versus 300 watts for Intel. The AMD part draws more power, which is expected given its higher core count and clocks. The Intel part is more power-efficient on paper, but the benchmark results show AMD delivering far more performance per watt in most tests.

Memory channels differ: twelve for AMD versus eight for Intel. Memory bandwidth differs: 576.0 GB/s versus 409.6 GB/s. L1 cache per core differs: 80 KB versus 112 KB. L2 cache per core differs: 1 MB versus 2 MB. L3 cache differs: 256 MB shared versus 288 MB shared.

Process node differs: 4 nm for AMD versus 5 nm for Intel. Foundry differs: TSMC for AMD versus Intel for the Intel part. Transistor count is listed only for AMD at 66,520 million. Die size differs: 8x 70.6 mm² for AMD versus 2x 598 mm² for Intel.

PCIe lanes differ: 128 for AMD versus 136 for Intel. Release dates differ: October 2024 for AMD versus February 2025 for Intel. The launch MSRP for the AMD EPYC 9555P is $7983. The launch MSRP for the Intel Xeon 6741P is $4421. Part numbers differ: 100-000001523 for AMD versus SRVEY for Intel. Both have no integrated graphics and both have locked multipliers.