AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P vs Intel Xeon w5-2565X Comparison

Intel Xeon w5-2565X and AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P are both 95th percentile server/workstation processors, but they take very different paths to that tier. The Intel part leans on high clock speeds and strong per-core performance, while the AMD chip counters with more cores, lower power draw, and a denser architecture. The benchmark data shows a clear split: Intel dominates the Cinebench suite and several Passmark compute workloads, while AMD takes encryption, prime number finding, physics simulation, and string sorting.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results are remarkably consistent. Across all six recorded runs, the Intel Xeon w5-2565X beats the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P by the same 6.2% margin in multi-core tests: 4446 vs 4187 in R15, 18527 vs 17447 in R20, and 44112 vs 41542 in R23. Single-core Cinebench tells the same story, with Intel ahead by 6.3% in R15 (627 vs 590) and 6.2% in both R20 (2615 vs 2462) and R23 (6227 vs 5864). This uniformity suggests a consistent architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The Passmark suite reveals where each chip flexes its muscles. Intel wins the single-thread test by a massive 52.5% (3595 vs 2357), which is the largest delta in the entire comparison. That advantage carries into extended instructions, where Intel scores 58976 against AMD's 46091, a 28% lead. Floating point math also favors Intel heavily: 147644 vs 120066, a 23% edge. Data compression goes to Intel by a narrower 6.5% (726133 vs 681754), and the Passmark multi-thread score lands at 51897 vs 48873, another 6.2% win for Intel.

AMD fights back in several specific workloads. The biggest reversal is in physics simulation, where the EPYC scores 4110 against Intel's 2622, a 36.2% advantage. Data encryption is another clear AMD win: 43619 vs 36365, a 16.6% margin. Prime number finding goes to AMD at 286 vs 218, a 23.8% lead. Random string sorting favors AMD at 85505 vs 74360, a 13% advantage. Integer math is the closest contest, with AMD edging out Intel 193256 vs 189446, just 2% apart.

Of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, Intel wins 12 and AMD wins 5, but the magnitude of AMD's wins in physics, encryption, and prime numbers shows this is not a one-sided matchup.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon w5-2565X is the pick for general compute throughput and anything that responds to high clock speeds. Its 4.80 GHz boost clock against AMD's 3.00 GHz explains the 52.5% single-thread gap, and that advantage compounds across Cinebench multi-core runs where Intel stays ahead despite having fewer cores. Extended instruction workloads such as SIMD-heavy code favor Intel by 28%, and floating point math by 23%. For rendering, video encoding, and scientific number crunching that relies on floating point, the data points squarely at Intel.

The AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P wins where its architecture and core count matter more than raw frequency. Physics simulation shows a 36.2% lead, which is significant for workloads that involve rigid body dynamics or particle systems. Data encryption at 16.6% ahead suggests the EPYC's cryptographic acceleration is more effective. Prime number finding, a heavily integer-bound workload, favors AMD by 23.8%, and random string sorting by 13%. Integer math is nearly a wash at 2% in AMD's favor, so the EPYC is the better choice for integer-heavy server tasks despite the overall multi-thread score being lower.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher multi-core Cinebench score?

A: The Intel Xeon w5-2565X wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests by 6.2%: 4446 vs 4187 in R15, 18527 vs 17447 in R20, and 44112 vs 41542 in R23.

Q: How much faster is the Intel chip in single-threaded workloads?

A: The Passmark single-thread test shows Intel at 3595 vs AMD's 2357, a 52.5% advantage. Cinebench single-core tests show a smaller but consistent 6.2% lead.

Q: Where does the AMD EPYC show its biggest advantage?

A: Physics simulation is AMD's largest win at 4110 vs 2622, a 36.2% margin. It also leads in prime number finding by 23.8% and data encryption by 16.6%.

Q: Do the two CPUs have the same core and thread counts?

A: No. The AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the Intel Xeon w5-2565X has 18 cores and 36 threads.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P with 230.4 GB/s over a six-channel memory bus, compared to Intel's 153.6 GB/s over quad-channel DDR5.

Q: What is the average benchmark score comparison?

A: Intel's average benchmark score is 80671, while AMD's is 76492. Both sit at the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ significantly: Intel has 18 cores and 36 threads, AMD has 24 cores and 48 threads. Clock speeds also diverge sharply, with Intel at 3.20 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost versus AMD's 2.55 GHz base and 3.00 GHz boost. Thermal design power favors AMD at 160 watts versus Intel's 240 watts. The Intel chip has an unlocked multiplier, while the AMD does not.

Memory configuration differs as well. Both support DDR5 and ECC memory, but AMD uses a six-channel bus delivering 230.4 GB/s, while Intel uses quad-channel at 153.6 GB/s. PCIe lanes favor AMD at Gen 5 with 96 lanes, compared to Intel's Gen 5 with 64 lanes. Sockets are incompatible: Intel uses Socket 4677, AMD uses Socket SP6.

The Intel part carries a launch MSRP of $1339 and was released in August 2024. AMD's launch MSRP is not recorded in the database, and its release date is September 2023.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. Intel's Sapphire Rapids uses a 10 nm process built at Intel's own foundry, while AMD's Siena uses a 5 nm process from TSMC with 17,750 million transistors across a 2x 73 mm² die configuration. AMD's Zen 4c architecture is designed for density, which explains how it fits more cores into a lower power envelope.

Cache layouts differ substantially. Intel provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 37.5 MB of shared L3. AMD provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3. The AMD chip's larger L3 cache at 64 MB versus Intel's 37.5 MB likely contributes to its wins in data-heavy workloads like string sorting and encryption, while Intel's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches support its single-thread dominance.

Both are active production parts aimed at the server and workstation segment. Intel does not have an integrated GPU, and AMD's integrated graphics are not specified in the database. The generation naming reflects the different roadmaps: Intel is Xeon W based on Sapphire Rapids, AMD is EPYC 8004 series based on Zen 4c Siena.

The Verdict

Choose the Intel Xeon w5-2565X if your priority is raw compute speed, especially single-threaded performance or floating point math. The data shows a 52.5% single-thread advantage and 23% floating point lead, plus consistent 6.2% wins across every Cinebench test. The unlocked multiplier is an option for tuning, and the 240 watt TDP is the price for that clock speed. It also carries a launch MSRP of $1339, which is the only pricing information in the database.

Choose the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P if your workloads match its strengths: physics simulation, encryption, prime number finding, or string sorting. The 36.2% physics lead and 16.6% encryption advantage are substantial. The 24-core count, 64 MB L3 cache, six-channel memory at 230.4 GB/s, and 96 PCIe Gen 5 lanes make it the more expandable platform, while the 160 watt TDP means less heat to manage. The lower clock speeds do not matter for workloads that scale across cores and cache. For mixed general-purpose server duty, Intel wins more benchmark comparisons, but AMD wins the specific workloads where its architecture is strongest.