AMD EPYC 9654P vs Intel Xeon 6333P Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data presents a starkly one-sided comparison. Across all six shared Cinebench tests, the AMD EPYC 9654P records a victory, with every result showing a delta of approximately 533% over the Intel Xeon 6333P. This consistency is remarkable; the smallest advantage, 533.1% in Cinebench R20 multicore and Cinebench R23 multicore, is virtually identical to the largest, 533.7% in Cinebench R20 singlecore.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the EPYC 9654P scores 9966 against the Xeon 6333P's 1574, a 533.2% lead. The singlecore result in the same test shows 1406 versus 222, a 533.3% advantage. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multicore result is 41527 for AMD and 6559 for Intel, and the singlecore result is 5862 versus 925, with deltas of 533.1% and 533.7% respectively. The Cinebench R23 results continue the pattern: 98875 against 15617 in multicore and 13958 against 2204 in singlecore, both at 533.1% and 533.3% deltas.

The scale of these margins indicates that the EPYC 9654P is not merely faster in these workloads; it is operating in a different performance class entirely. The Xeon 6333P, while a capable processor in its own right based on its benchmark scores, cannot approach the EPYC's output in any of the measured Cinebench scenarios. The data shows no shared test where the Intel part takes a win, resulting in a 6 to 0 record for the AMD processor in these head-to-head comparisons.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the head-to-head data, the AMD EPYC 9654P is the clear winner in all measured Cinebench workloads, which are the only tests shared between the two processors. This includes both multicore and singlecore variants of Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. The multicore victories are expected given the EPYC's massive thread count, but the singlecore wins are equally decisive, with deltas like 533.3% in R15 and R23 singlecore, and 533.7% in R20 singlecore. This suggests that the EPYC's architecture delivers superior performance per thread in these rendering tasks as well.

The Intel Xeon 6333P does not register a win in any shared benchmark. However, the database includes additional PassMark tests for the Xeon that are not present for the EPYC, such as PassMark data compression (199886), data encryption (11025), extended instructions (13039), find prime numbers (83), floating point math (43801), integer math (61458), multithread (18374), physics (1320), random string sorting (22010), and single thread (3450). Since no comparable EPYC scores exist for these tests, no head-to-head conclusion can be drawn from them. The data therefore shows the EPYC 9654P winning every directly comparable workload, with the Xeon 6333P's specific strengths, if any, remaining unquantified against the AMD part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher Cinebench R23 multicore score?

A: The AMD EPYC 9654P scores 98875, while the Intel Xeon 6333P scores 15617. The EPYC leads by 533.1% in this test.

Q: How do the singlecore scores compare in Cinebench R20?

A: The AMD EPYC 9654P records 5862, and the Intel Xeon 6333P records 925. This gives the EPYC a 533.7% advantage in singlecore performance.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the Intel Xeon 6333P beats the AMD EPYC 9654P?

A: No. In the six head-to-head benchmarks recorded, all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore and singlecore tests, the AMD EPYC 9654P wins every one.

Q: What is the largest performance delta recorded between the two?

A: The largest delta is 533.7% in the Cinebench R20 singlecore test, where the EPYC scores 5862 against the Xeon's 925. The other tests are nearly identical, with deltas ranging from 533.1% to 533.3%.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon 6333P have any benchmark scores that the AMD EPYC 9654P lacks?

A: Yes. The database lists PassMark tests for the Xeon, including data compression (199886), data encryption (11025), floating point math (43801), and integer math (61458), among others. No corresponding EPYC scores are recorded for these tests.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The AMD EPYC 9654P has an average benchmark score of 24465, and the Intel Xeon 6333P has an average benchmark score of 23823.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ substantially in their core and thread configurations. The AMD EPYC 9654P has 96 cores and 192 threads, while the Intel Xeon 6333P has 6 cores and 12 threads. Clock speeds also differ: the EPYC has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz, whereas the Xeon has a base clock of 3.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. Thermal design power varies significantly, with the EPYC rated at 360 W and the Xeon at 65 W.

The memory support differs as well. The EPYC uses DDR5 memory with a twelve-channel memory bus and a memory bandwidth of 460.8 GB/s. The Xeon supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory but uses a dual-channel memory bus, and no memory bandwidth figure is recorded for it. PCIe lane counts are also different: the EPYC provides Gen 5 with 128 lanes (CPU only), while the Xeon provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics field shows "N/A" for the Xeon and is null for the EPYC. The release dates are apart, with the EPYC released on 2022-11-09 and the Xeon on 2025-02-23. The launch MSRP for the EPYC is $10625, and for the Xeon it is $319. The part numbers are 100-100000803 for AMD and SRPLV for Intel.

Architecture Differences

The AMD EPYC 9654P belongs to the EPYC 9004 series and uses the Zen 4 architecture with the codename Genoa. It is built on a 5 nm process node at TSMC and contains 78,840 million transistors with a die size described as 12x 72 mm². Its cache layout includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 384 MB of shared L3 cache. It uses AMD Socket SP5.

The Intel Xeon 6333P is part of the Xeon 6 generation with the Raptor Lake Refresh codename, using the Raptor Lake architecture. It is built on a 10 nm process node at Intel and has a die size of 163 mm². No transistor count is recorded. Its cache includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. It uses Intel Socket 1700. Both processors support ECC memory and have locked multipliers. The market segment for both is Server/Workstation, and both are marked as Active in production status.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear choice for workloads covered by the shared Cinebench tests. The AMD EPYC 9654P dominates every head-to-head benchmark, with leads of over 533% in all six tests. Its 96 cores and 192 threads, combined with 384 MB of L3 cache and a twelve-channel DDR5 memory interface with 460.8 GB/s bandwidth, make it the definitive performer in these rendering workloads. The Xeon 6333P, despite its higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz and lower 65 W TDP, cannot compete in raw output, as its 6 cores and 12 threads limit its multicore ceiling, and its singlecore scores also trail by margins exceeding 533%.

For users prioritizing maximum Cinebench performance and working within a server or workstation environment that can accommodate a 360 W processor on AMD Socket SP5, the EPYC 9654P is the only logical selection based on these measurements. Its launch MSRP is $10625. The Intel Xeon 6333P, with a launch MSRP of $319, is a lower-power alternative on Intel Socket 1700, but the recorded data shows no benchmark where it outperforms the EPYC. Its additional PassMark scores, such as 199886 in data compression and 43801 in floating point math, are recorded in the database, but without comparable EPYC results, they do not constitute a head-to-head advantage. The verdict from the data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 9654P wins every directly comparable test, making it the superior choice for the measured workloads.