CPU Comparison

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data tells a lopsided story. Across the 14 shared tests, AMD EPYC 9684X claims 12 wins, while Intel Xeon 6774P takes only 2. The pattern is consistent: AMD dominates in nearly every multithreaded and specialized workload, while Intel's single-thread advantage is real but narrow.

Start with the largest margins. The EPYC 9684X crushes the Xeon in passmark_find_prime_numbers, scoring 2020 versus 1264, a 37.4% lead. Data encryption shows a similar gap: 178453 versus 115025, a 35.5% delta. Physics tests follow the same trend, with AMD ahead by 35.1% (24686 versus 16023). These are not marginal differences; they represent fundamental throughput advantages in compute-heavy integer and physics workloads.

The Cinebench series shows remarkable consistency. Across R15, R20, and R23 multicore tests, the EPYC 9684X wins each by exactly 7.3%. Scores of 10418 versus 9660 (R15), 43409 versus 40251 (R20), and 103355 versus 95836 (R23) all show the same relative gap. This uniformity suggests a stable architectural edge rather than workload-specific optimization.

Integer math is another decisive AMD territory. The EPYC 9684X scores 844145 versus 593440, a 29.7% advantage. Random string sorting follows with a 24.8% lead (349126 versus 262417). Data compression shows a 14.4% edge (2698807 versus 2309868). Even floating-point math, where the margin narrows to 1.5% (472174 versus 465314), still favors AMD.

The extended instructions benchmark is nearly a dead heat. AMD wins by just 0.4% (177956 versus 177273). This near-parity suggests both processors handle AVX-style workloads at similar efficiency, even when other tests show large gaps.

The lone Intel victory comes in single-thread performance. The Xeon 6774P scores 3047 versus 2891 on passmark_single_thread, a 5.4% lead. This is the only category where Intel outperforms, and the margin is modest compared to AMD's double-digit wins elsewhere.

The aggregate picture is clear. The EPYC 9684X's average benchmark score sits at 266914, while the Xeon 6774P averages 300372. Both rank in the 99th percentile of all CPUs, but their nearest rivals tell different stories. The Xeon's closest competitor is the AMD EPYC 9734 (3.3% behind) and the EPYC 9575F (3.7% behind), while the EPYC 9684X sits 4.6% ahead of the AMD EPYC 9565 and 6.1% ahead of the Intel Xeon 6980P.

# Architecture Differences

The architectural split is stark. Intel's Xeon 6774P uses Granite Rapids architecture on a 5 nm process fabricated by Intel, with a die size of 2x 598 mm². AMD's EPYC 9684X uses Zen 4 architecture in the Genoa-X codename, also on 5 nm but fabricated by TSMC, with a dramatically different 12x 72 mm² chiplet design.

Core counts differ substantially. The Xeon 6774P packs 64 cores and 128 threads, while the EPYC 9684X offers 96 cores and 192 threads. That's a 50% core advantage for AMD, which explains much of the multithreaded benchmark superiority. Clock speeds are closer: the Xeon has a 2.50 GHz base and 3.90 GHz boost, while AMD runs 2.55 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost. Intel's higher boost clock aligns with its single-thread win.

Cache hierarchies reveal the most dramatic divergence. The Xeon 6774P has 112 KB L1 per core and 2 MB L2 per core, with 336 MB shared L3. The EPYC 9684X has smaller per-core caches (64 KB L1, 1 MB L2) but a colossal 1152 MB shared L3, more than three times Intel's L3. This massive L3 pool likely drives AMD's large lead in data compression and random string sorting, where cache residency matters.

Memory architecture also differs. Both support DDR5 with ECC, but Intel runs eight-channel memory with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth, while AMD uses twelve channels delivering 460.8 GB/s. AMD's higher bandwidth complements its larger cache and more cores. PCIe lanes are close: Intel offers Gen 5 with 136 lanes, AMD provides Gen 5 with 128 lanes.

Transistor counts are only listed for AMD: 135,240 million. Intel's die size of 2x 598 mm² suggests a monolithic-plus design, while AMD's 12x 72 mm² chiplets enable the higher core count. The foundry difference (Intel versus TSMC) is notable but both achieve 5 nm.

# Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 9684X is the clear choice for throughput-bound workloads. Its 96 cores and 192 threads dominate in Cinebench multicore tests, where it consistently outperforms by 7.3%. Data encryption (35.5% lead), prime number finding (37.4% lead), and physics (35.1% lead) all indicate workloads that scale with core count and memory bandwidth.

AMD also excels in memory-intensive tasks. The 1152 MB L3 cache and 460.8 GB/s bandwidth give it substantial leads in data compression (14.4%) and random string sorting (24.8%). Integer math, with a 29.7% advantage, suggests database and analytics workloads favor the AMD part.

The Xeon 6774P wins only in single-thread performance, with a 5.4% edge. This points to workloads that are latency-sensitive or poorly threaded. Legacy applications, certain database queries, or software with serial bottlenecks would see modest benefits from Intel's higher boost clock of 3.90 GHz versus AMD's 3.70 GHz.

Floating-point math is nearly a tie (1.5% AMD lead), suggesting scientific computing workloads would see similar performance from either processor. Extended instructions are also essentially equal (0.4% AMD lead), meaning SIMD-heavy code won't strongly favor either.

For virtualized environments or container hosts with many small workloads, AMD's core count advantage and larger cache likely provide better density. Intel's single-thread lead, however, could benefit workloads that cannot utilize more than a few cores effectively.

# Specification Differences

• Cores: Intel Xeon 6774P has 64 cores; AMD EPYC 9684X has 96 cores
• Threads: Intel has 128; AMD has 192
• Base clock: Intel 2.50 GHz; AMD 2.55 GHz
• Boost clock: Intel 3.90 GHz; AMD 3.70 GHz
• TDP: Intel 350 W; AMD 400 W
• Socket: Intel Socket 4710; AMD Socket SP5
• Architecture/codename: Granite Rapids; Zen 4 / Genoa-X
• Foundry: Intel; TSMC
• Die size: 2x 598 mm²; 12x 72 mm²
• L1 cache per core: 112 KB; 64 KB
• L2 cache per core: 2 MB; 1 MB
• L3 cache shared: 336 MB; 1152 MB
• Memory bus: Eight-channel; Twelve-channel
• Memory bandwidth: 409.6 GB/s; 460.8 GB/s
• PCIe lanes: 136; 128
• Transistors: not listed; 135,240 million
• Release date: 2025-05-21; 2023-06-12
• Part number: SRWPC; 100-100000892

# FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD EPYC 9684X has 96 cores versus 64 on the Intel Xeon 6774P, and 192 threads versus 128.

Q: How large is the L3 cache difference?

A: The AMD EPYC 9684X has 1152 MB shared L3, while the Intel Xeon 6774P has 336 MB. AMD's cache is more than three times larger.

Q: Who wins in single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Xeon 6774P scores 3047 on passmark_single_thread versus AMD's 2891, giving Intel a 5.4% lead.

Q: What is the biggest benchmark delta between the two?

A: The largest gap is in passmark_find_prime_numbers, where AMD leads by 37.4% (2020 versus 1264).

Q: Do both support DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, both support DDR5 with ECC, but AMD uses twelve channels (460.8 GB/s) while Intel uses eight channels (409.6 GB/s).

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The Intel Xeon 6774P has a TDP of 350 W, while the AMD EPYC 9684X has a TDP of 400 W.

# The Verdict

The data points decisively toward the AMD EPYC 9684X for most server workloads. Its 12 benchmark wins versus 2 for Intel, combined with a 50% core advantage and over three times the L3 cache, make it the dominant choice for multithreaded, memory-intensive, and throughput-heavy applications. The 7.3% Cinebench multicore advantage and double-digit leads in encryption, prime finding, physics, integer math, and string sorting all indicate that scaling with cores and cache is what matters most in modern server environments.

The Intel Xeon 6774P is the pick only when single-thread performance is the priority. Its 5.4% lead in that category, along with a higher boost clock (3.90 GHz versus 3.70 GHz), makes it suitable for latency-sensitive, lightly threaded workloads. However, the overall benchmark average favors Intel (300372 versus 266914), which seems paradoxical given AMD's win count. This is explained by the Xeon's higher single-thread score and near-parity in floating-point and extended instructions boosting its average despite losing most tests.

For mixed workloads, the AMD part's consistent wins across diverse tests, from compression to encryption to physics, suggest greater versatility. The 400 W TDP versus 350 W may be a consideration, but the performance per watt appears favorable given the magnitude of wins. The EPYC 9684X, despite being older (2023 release versus 2025), remains the stronger performer in almost every measurable category. The Xeon 6774P's only clear domain is single-threaded execution, which may be insufficient justification for most data center deployments.