AMD EPYC 9565 vs Intel Xeon 6780E Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD EPYC 9565 posts an average benchmark score of 285471, while the Intel Xeon 6780E scores 280438. The delta between them is 1.8% in favor of the AMD part.

Q: How do the two chips compare in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The AMD EPYC 9565 wins the PassMark multithread test with a score of 135221 versus 86734 for the Intel Xeon 6780E, a 55.9% advantage. The same 55.9% delta appears across all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests.

Q: Which processor offers better single-thread performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 9565 dominates single-thread tests. In PassMark single-thread, it scores 3696 against 1923 for the Intel Xeon 6780E, a 92.2% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 16226 versus 73723’s counterpart at 73723 — the AMD part leads by the same 55.9% delta seen in all Cinebench tests.

Q: Are there any workloads where the Intel Xeon 6780E beats the AMD EPYC 9565?

A: Yes, two benchmark categories favor Intel. The Xeon 6780E wins PassMark data encryption with 193004 versus 141936 (a 26.5% advantage for Intel), and PassMark random string sorting with 326954 versus 291941 (a 10.7% margin).

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The Intel Xeon 6780E has 144 cores and 144 threads (no simultaneous multithreading). The AMD EPYC 9565 has 72 cores and 144 threads, meaning the AMD chip relies on SMT to match the thread count.

Q: How do the two processors compare in the overall performance percentile?

A: Both sit at the 99th percentile among all CPUs. The AMD EPYC 9565’s nearest rival, the Intel Xeon 696X, is 0.2% ahead, while the Intel Xeon 6780E’s nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X, is 0.2% behind.

Architecture Differences

The AMD EPYC 9565 is built on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Turin, part of the EPYC 9005 series. It uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, with a die composed of 12 chiplets at 70.6 mm² each. The transistor count is listed at 99,780 million. This is a 72-core, 144-thread design with a base clock of 3.15 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz.

The Intel Xeon 6780E uses the Sierra Forest architecture, part of the Xeon 6 generation (Sierra Forest-SP). It is manufactured on Intel’s 5 nm process, with a single die measuring 578 mm². This processor has 144 cores and 144 threads — notably, it does not support simultaneous multithreading, so core count equals thread count. Base clock is 2.20 GHz, boost clock is 3.00 GHz.

Cache layouts differ substantially. The AMD EPYC 9565 provides 80 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 384 MB of shared L3. The Intel Xeon 6780E offers 96 KB L1 per core, 4 MB L2 per module, and only 108 MB of shared L3 — less than a third of the AMD chip’s L3 capacity.

Memory architecture also diverges. The EPYC 9565 supports twelve-channel DDR5 with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Xeon 6780E supports eight-channel DDR5 with 409.6 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. PCIe lanes differ as well: 128 Gen 5 lanes for AMD versus 88 Gen 5 lanes for Intel.

Socket platforms are incompatible: the AMD part uses Socket SP5, the Intel part uses Socket 4710. The TDP ratings are 400 W for AMD and 330 W for Intel. The AMD chip has a launch MSRP of $10486; the Intel chip has a launch MSRP of $11350.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD EPYC 9565 wins 14 of the 16 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The most striking result is PassMark find prime numbers, where AMD scores 2422 versus Intel’s 708 — a 242.1% advantage. This is the largest single delta in the entire comparison.

Cinebench results are uniformly one-sided. Across R15, R20, and R23, both multi-core and single-core, the AMD EPYC 9565 leads by exactly 55.9% in every test. For example, Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 114937 for AMD versus 73723 for Intel. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 1635 versus 1049.

PassMark extended instructions show an 83.8% lead for AMD (209595 versus 114008). PassMark physics follows with a 64.7% margin (18036 versus 10951). Single-thread performance in PassMark gives AMD a 92.2% edge (3696 versus 1923). Floating-point math favors AMD by 26.6% (549422 versus 433862), and integer math by 11.9% (717948 versus 641817).

The Intel Xeon 6780E claims two wins. In PassMark data encryption, Intel scores 193004 against AMD’s 141936, a 26.5% advantage. In PassMark random string sorting, Intel scores 326954 versus 291941, a 10.7% lead. These are the only tests where the Intel part outperforms the AMD chip.

Data compression is nearly a tie: AMD scores 2579631, Intel scores 2557582, with AMD ahead by just 0.9%. This is the closest contest in the entire benchmark suite.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 9565 | Intel Xeon 6780E |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 72 | 144 |

| Threads | 144 | 144 |

| Base Clock | 3.15 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.30 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| TDP | 400 W | 330 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP5 | Intel Socket 4710 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Sierra Forest |

| Codename | Turin | Sierra Forest |

| Process Node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 5 nm (Intel) |

| Die Size | 12x 70.6 mm² | 578 mm² |

| Transistors | 99,780 million | N/A |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 4 MB (per module) |

| L3 Cache | 384 MB (shared) | 108 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Twelve-channel | Eight-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 576.0 GB/s | 409.6 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 128 Lanes | Gen 5, 88 Lanes |

| Launch MSRP | $10486 | $11350 |

The most consequential differences are core count (144 versus 72), clock speeds (Intel is lower on both base and boost), L3 cache (384 MB versus 108 MB), memory bandwidth (576.0 GB/s versus 409.6 GB/s), and PCIe lane count (128 versus 88). The Intel part has a lower TDP (330 W versus 400 W) and a higher launch MSRP ($11350 versus $10486).

The Verdict

The benchmark data consistently favors the AMD EPYC 9565. It wins 14 of 16 tests, and in the two tests it loses, the margins are smaller than its own victories in most categories. The average benchmark score difference — 285471 versus 280438 — confirms the AMD part as the higher-performing processor overall.

The Intel Xeon 6780E’s advantages are narrow and specific. Its wins in encryption and string sorting suggest particular strengths in those workloads, but they do not offset the AMD chip’s broad dominance across rendering, math, and single-thread performance.

The AMD EPYC 9565’s 55.9% lead in every Cinebench test — both single-core and multi-core — indicates a fundamental performance advantage per thread that the Intel part cannot overcome despite having twice the cores. The Intel Xeon 6780E’s 144 threads match the AMD part’s thread count, yet the AMD processor still wins all multithreaded benchmarks by wide margins.

For buyers prioritizing raw compute across a wide range of workloads, the AMD EPYC 9565 is the clear choice. The Intel Xeon 6780E makes sense only for environments where its specific encryption and sorting performance is more valuable than the AMD chip’s advantages elsewhere.

Where Each One Wins

AMD EPYC 9565 wins in:

• All Cinebench rendering tests (R15, R20, R23), multi-core and single-core, with a 55.9% margin in every case
• PassMark multithread (55.9% ahead)
• PassMark single-thread (92.2% ahead)
• PassMark extended instructions (83.8% ahead)
• PassMark find prime numbers (242.1% ahead)
• PassMark physics (64.7% ahead)
• PassMark floating-point math (26.6% ahead)
• PassMark integer math (11.9% ahead)
• PassMark data compression (0.9% ahead, near tie)

Intel Xeon 6780E wins in:

• PassMark data encryption (26.5% ahead)
• PassMark random string sorting (10.7% ahead)

The AMD EPYC 9565 is the default recommendation for general compute, rendering, mathematical workloads, and any application sensitive to per-core performance or memory bandwidth. The Intel Xeon 6780E is the specialist choice for encryption-heavy or string-sorting-heavy pipelines, where its 144 cores and higher L2 cache per module (4 MB) appear to confer an advantage. Outside those two niches, the data does not support choosing the Intel part.