AMD EPYC 9555P vs Intel Xeon 6980P Comparison

The AMD EPYC 9555P dominates this head-to-head comparison, winning 15 of 17 benchmark tests against the Intel Xeon 6980P, with the Intel part claiming only 2 victories. The scale of AMD's advantage is striking, particularly in multi-threaded workloads where the EPYC 9555P posts scores that are often 40-50% higher despite having half the core count. The Intel Xeon 6980P does retain wins in extended instruction throughput and floating-point math, but these are narrow margins compared to the chasms AMD opens elsewhere.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results paint a stark picture of overall compute capability. Across all three versions—R15, R20, and R23—the AMD EPYC 9555P beats the Intel Xeon 6980P by exactly 45.2% in both single-core and multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, AMD scores 115,186 versus Intel's 63,175, a gap that suggests the Zen 5 architecture extracts far more work per clock than Granite Rapids. The single-core R23 result is even more revealing: 16,261 for AMD versus 8,918 for Intel, meaning the EPYC 9555P is nearly twice as fast on a per-thread basis.

PassMark's multithread test confirms the trend, with AMD posting 123,576 against Intel's 74,324, a 39.9% deficit for the Xeon. The physics test shows the most extreme divergence: AMD scores 15,474 while Intel manages only 3,350, a 78.4% gap that dwarfs every other benchmark in the set. This particular result hints at fundamental differences in how each processor handles simulation or constraint-based workloads, with the AMD part appearing to sustain far higher throughput.

AMD also wins the integer math test decisively, scoring 787,106 versus Intel's 637,476 (19% ahead). Data compression favors AMD by 10.4% (2,639,400 vs 2,364,519), and random string sorting goes to AMD by 14.1% (280,398 vs 240,792). Even data encryption, which often favors Intel's AES-NI implementations, goes to AMD by 15.9% (148,896 vs 125,246). The single-thread PassMark score shows AMD at 3,410 versus Intel's 1,681, a 50.7% advantage.

Intel's two wins are narrow but worth noting. In extended instructions, the Xeon 6980P scores 214,794 against AMD's 191,082, a 12.4% margin that suggests Intel's AVX-512 implementation retains an edge for certain vectorized code paths. Floating-point math goes to Intel by just 3.1% (501,720 vs 486,407), a slim win that may reflect the Xeon's larger L3 cache (504 MB shared vs 256 MB shared) helping with data reuse in FP-heavy loops.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 9555P is the clear choice for workloads that stress raw thread throughput and single-core responsiveness. The Cinebench sweep—all six tests won by the same 45.2% margin—indicates that AMD's combination of higher clocks (4.40 GHz boost vs 3.90 GHz) and more efficient Zen 5 cores translates into consistent wins across rendering, simulation, and general compute tasks. The physics benchmark result, where AMD is 78.4% ahead, suggests particular strength in constraint-solving and iterative numerical methods.

AMD also dominates integer-heavy tasks like data compression, encryption, and random string sorting. These are common in database, file-server, and security workloads. The 50.7% single-thread advantage means even lightly threaded applications will run noticeably faster on the EPYC 9555P, which is unusual for a server chip with 64 cores.

The Intel Xeon 6980P wins in extended instructions, which typically cover specialized SIMD operations beyond the standard x86 set. The 12.4% edge here could matter for HPC codes that heavily use AVX-512 integer or bit-manipulation instructions. The floating-point math win, though only 3.1%, suggests Intel's FP pipeline remains competitive when the working set fits in its large L3 cache. For scientific computing where FP64 throughput is the bottleneck, the Xeon 6980P offers a slight but measurable advantage.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 9555P outperforms the Intel Xeon 6980P in 15 of 17 benchmarks, often by substantial margins. For any workload that benefits from high single-thread performance or general multi-core throughput, the EPYC 9555P is the stronger processor. The 45.2% Cinebench advantage across the board indicates that AMD's architectural efficiency—achieved with half the cores (64 vs 128)—makes the Xeon's core-count advantage nearly irrelevant in practice.

The Intel Xeon 6980P should only be selected if extended instructions or floating-point math are the primary workload, and even then the 12.4% and 3.1% margins are modest compared to AMD's 78.4% win in physics. The Xeon does offer more L3 cache (504 MB vs 256 MB), which could help in cache-sensitive applications, but the benchmark data does not show this translating into broad wins.

For most server and workstation buyers, the EPYC 9555P is the data-driven recommendation. It delivers higher performance across a wider range of tasks, with the only meaningful trade-off being the Intel part's wins in two specialized areas. The EPYC 9555P's 99th percentile ranking among all CPUs, paired with an average benchmark score of 287,066 versus Intel's 251,516, reinforces this conclusion.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmark tests?

A: The AMD EPYC 9555P wins 15 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, while the Intel Xeon 6980P wins only 2.

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

A: In PassMark physics, the AMD EPYC 9555P scores 15,474 versus Intel's 3,350, a 78.4% difference favoring AMD.

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

A: Yes, it wins extended instructions by 12.4% (214,794 vs 191,082) and floating-point math by 3.1% (501,720 vs 486,407).

Q: How do the single-core performances compare?

A: The AMD EPYC 9555P is 50.7% faster in PassMark single-thread (3,410 vs 1,681) and 45.2% faster in Cinebench R23 single-core (16,261 vs 8,918).

Q: Are the Cinebench results consistent across versions?

A: Yes, in R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core tests show AMD winning by exactly 45.2% each time.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The AMD EPYC 9555P has an average benchmark score of 287,066, while the Intel Xeon 6980P scores 251,516, a difference of about 14%.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Xeon 6980P uses Granite Rapids architecture on a 5 nm process from Intel, while the AMD EPYC 9555P uses Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm process from TSMC. Intel's chip is built from three 598 mm² dies, whereas AMD uses eight 70.6 mm² chiplets containing 66,520 million transistors.

Core counts diverge sharply: the Xeon 6980P has 128 cores and 256 threads, while the EPYC 9555P has 64 cores and 128 threads. Despite the Xeon having twice the cores, AMD achieves higher performance, indicating that per-core efficiency is the decisive factor. Clock speeds also favor AMD: 3.20 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost versus Intel's 2.00 GHz base and 3.90 GHz boost.

Cache hierarchies differ in capacity but not in per-core allocation strategy. Intel provides 112 KB L1 and 2 MB L2 per core, with 504 MB shared L3. AMD provides 80 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, with 256 MB shared L3. The Intel part's larger L3 could help with cache-resident datasets, but the benchmark results do not show a consistent advantage from this.

Memory subsystems are similar in channel count—both use twelve-channel DDR5—but Intel's bandwidth is higher at 614.4 GB/s versus AMD's 576.0 GB/s. PCIe lane counts favor AMD: 128 Gen 5 lanes versus Intel's 96 Gen 5 lanes. Both support ECC memory and lack integrated graphics.

Specification Differences

The most obvious difference is core count: Intel offers 128 cores and 256 threads, while AMD offers 64 cores and 128 threads. Thermal design power also differs, with Intel rated at 500 W and AMD at 360 W, meaning the AMD part delivers more performance with lower power draw.

Base and boost clocks are higher on the AMD chip: 3.20 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost versus Intel's 2.00 GHz base and 3.90 GHz boost. The process node favors AMD at 4 nm (TSMC) versus Intel at 5 nm (Intel foundry). Socket compatibility is entirely separate: Intel Socket 7529 versus AMD Socket SP5.

The L3 cache is larger on Intel (504 MB shared vs 256 MB shared), but AMD has a smaller die footprint per chiplet (70.6 mm² vs 598 mm² per die). Memory bandwidth favors Intel at 614.4 GB/s versus AMD's 576.0 GB/s. PCIe lanes favor AMD at 128 Gen 5 versus Intel's 96 Gen 5.

Release dates differ by about two weeks: Intel launched on 2024-09-23 and AMD on 2024-10-09. The launch MSRP is $12,460 for Intel and $7,983 for AMD. Both parts are active in production, target the server/workstation segment, and have locked multipliers.