AMD EPYC 9634 vs Intel Xeon 6774P Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data positions the Intel Xeon 6774P as the overall performance leader in this direct comparison, winning 12 of the 14 head-to-head tests. The AMD EPYC 9634 takes only two wins, but those are decisive in specific workloads. For general multi-threaded compute, rendering, and physics simulations, the Intel part is the stronger choice. For integer-heavy data processing and encryption tasks, the AMD EPYC 9634 is the clear pick.

The Intel Xeon 6774P posts a higher average benchmark score of 300,372 compared to the AMD EPYC 9634’s 244,274. Both processors sit at the 99th percentile among all CPUs in the database, so either one is a top-tier server part. The data indicates the Intel processor delivers roughly 23% higher average performance, but that aggregate hides the fact that the AMD chip wins by large margins in its two strongest areas. The decision rests on workload mix: choose Intel for floating-point math, physics, and extended instruction throughput; choose AMD for integer math and data encryption.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Xeon 6774P uses the Granite Rapids architecture, fabricated on Intel’s 5 nm process, with a die size of 2x 598 mm². The AMD EPYC 9634 uses the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Genoa, also on a 5 nm process but fabricated by TSMC, with a chiplet design of 12x 72 mm². AMD’s chip lists 78,840 million transistors, while the Intel part does not have a transistor count recorded in the database.

Core counts differ significantly. The AMD EPYC 9634 has 84 cores and 168 threads, while the Intel Xeon 6774P has 64 cores and 128 threads. Despite having 20 fewer cores, the Intel chip matches or beats the AMD part in most multi-threaded benchmarks, indicating higher per-core efficiency in those tests. The Intel processor runs at a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz, compared to AMD’s 2.25 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost. The Intel part also has a higher TDP of 350 watts versus 290 watts for the AMD chip.

Cache hierarchies reveal different strategies. The Intel Xeon 6774P has 112 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 336 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD EPYC 9634 has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a larger 384 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD chip’s larger total L3 is notable, but its smaller per-core L1 and L2 caches may explain why Intel wins in several latency-sensitive tests.

Memory architecture also differs. The Intel part supports DDR5 over an eight-channel memory bus with 409.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD part supports DDR5 over a twelve-channel bus with a higher 460.8 GB/s of bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity is close: Intel offers Gen 5 with 136 lanes (CPU only), while AMD offers Gen 5 with 128 lanes (CPU only). The AMD chip was released earlier, on 2022-11-09, while the Intel part launched on 2025-05-21.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Xeon 6774P dominates the Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 9,660 against AMD’s 9,248, a 4.5% lead. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, Intel scores 40,251 versus 38,535, again 4.5% ahead. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows the same 4.5% margin: 95,836 for Intel against 91,752 for AMD. These consistent margins suggest a systematic advantage in rendering workloads.

The largest Intel win comes in PassMark floating-point math, where the Xeon 6774P scores 465,314 against 353,784 for the EPYC 9634, a 31.5% advantage. Physics performance follows a similar pattern: Intel scores 16,023 versus 12,291, a 30.4% lead. Extended instructions show Intel ahead by 28.9%, scoring 177,273 versus 137,543. Prime number finding favors Intel by 7.5% (1,264 versus 1,176). Data compression goes to Intel by 3.3% (2,309,868 versus 2,236,412). Multi-thread performance in PassMark shows Intel at 112,749 versus 107,944, a 4.5% lead. Single-thread performance is close but favors Intel: 3,047 versus 2,924, a 4.2% margin. Random string sorting is nearly identical, with Intel ahead by just 0.5% (262,417 versus 261,134).

The AMD EPYC 9634 takes two decisive wins. In PassMark data encryption, AMD scores 151,943 against Intel’s 115,025, a 24.3% advantage. In PassMark integer math, AMD scores 725,356 versus 593,440, an 18.2% lead. These are substantial margins in workloads that rely on integer throughput and cryptographic operations. The AMD chip’s higher core count and larger L3 cache likely contribute to these results, though the database does not explicitly state the causal mechanism.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors in the database:

• Cores: Intel 64, AMD 84
• Threads: Intel 128, AMD 168
• Base clock: Intel 2.50 GHz, AMD 2.25 GHz
• Boost clock: Intel 3.90 GHz, AMD 3.70 GHz
• TDP: Intel 350 W, AMD 290 W
• Socket: Intel Socket 4710, AMD Socket SP5
• Architecture: Granite Rapids, Zen 4
• Codename: Granite Rapids, Genoa
• Generation: Xeon 6 (Granite Rapids-SP), EPYC (Zen 4 (Genoa))
• Foundry: Intel, TSMC
• Transistors: Not recorded for Intel, 78,840 million for AMD
• Die size: 2x 598 mm² for Intel, 12x 72 mm² for AMD
• L1 cache: 112 KB per core (Intel), 64 KB per core (AMD)
• L2 cache: 2 MB per core (Intel), 1 MB per core (AMD)
• L3 cache: 336 MB shared (Intel), 384 MB shared (AMD)
• Memory bus: Eight-channel (Intel), Twelve-channel (AMD)
• Memory bandwidth: 409.6 GB/s (Intel), 460.8 GB/s (AMD)
• PCIe lanes: 136 (Intel), 128 (AMD)
• Release date: 2025-05-21 (Intel), 2022-11-09 (AMD)
• Launch MSRP: Intel $6760, AMD $10304
• Part number: SRWPC (Intel), 100-100000797 (AMD)

The Intel part has a higher boost clock and more L1 and L2 cache per core. The AMD part has more cores, more threads, a larger L3 cache, higher memory bandwidth, and a twelve-channel memory bus. The Intel part has more PCIe lanes and a lower launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core rendering?

A: The Intel Xeon 6774P wins all three Cinebench multi-core tests by 4.5% each: R15 (9,660 vs 9,248), R20 (40,251 vs 38,535), and R23 (95,836 vs 91,752).

Q: Does the AMD EPYC 9634 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins two. It scores 151,943 in PassMark data encryption versus 115,025 for Intel, a 24.3% lead, and 725,356 in PassMark integer math versus 593,440, an 18.2% lead.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The AMD EPYC 9634 has 84 cores and 168 threads. The Intel Xeon 6774P has 64 cores and 128 threads. Despite fewer cores, Intel wins 12 of 14 head-to-head tests.

Q: Which processor has more cache?

A: The AMD EPYC 9634 has a larger shared L3 cache at 384 MB versus 336 MB for Intel. However, Intel has more L1 cache per core (112 KB vs 64 KB) and more L2 cache per core (2 MB vs 1 MB).

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures?

A: The AMD EPYC 9634 offers 460.8 GB/s over a twelve-channel DDR5 bus. The Intel Xeon 6774P offers 409.6 GB/s over an eight-channel DDR5 bus.

Q: Which processor has a higher single-thread score?

A: The Intel Xeon 6774P scores 3,047 in PassMark single-thread, compared to 2,924 for the AMD EPYC 9634, a 4.2% advantage.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon 6774P is the clear winner for floating-point math, physics simulation, and extended instruction workloads. Its 31.5% lead in floating-point math and 30.4% lead in physics make it the better choice for scientific computing, engineering simulations, and any workload that relies heavily on FPU throughput. It also holds a 28.9% advantage in extended instructions, which matters for vectorized and specialized instruction sets. The consistent 4.5% margins across all three Cinebench tests indicate reliable multi-core rendering performance. The Intel part also edges out the AMD chip in data compression, prime number finding, multi-thread, and single-thread tests, making it the more balanced all-rounder.

The AMD EPYC 9634 is the winner for integer math and data encryption. Its 18.2% lead in integer math (725,356 versus 593,440) makes it the better choice for database operations, financial calculations, and other integer-heavy tasks. The 24.3% lead in data encryption (151,943 versus 115,025) positions it as the stronger option for cryptographic workloads, secure communications, and any application that performs heavy encryption or decryption. The AMD chip also offers higher memory bandwidth (460.8 GB/s vs 409.6 GB/s) and more cores (84 vs 64), which may benefit workloads that scale with core count and memory throughput, though the benchmark data does not show a direct win in those specific tests.