AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G vs Intel Xeon Gold 6334 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data paints a clear picture: the Intel Xeon Gold 6334 wins every recorded head-to-head comparison. Across six Cinebench tests, spanning R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core workloads, the Xeon Gold 6334 takes the top spot each time. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G does not register a single win in the shared benchmark suite.

However, the margin of victory is narrow. The largest delta between the two processors is just 1.4%, recorded in both Cinebench R20 single-core and R23 single-core. The smallest edge is 1.2%, seen in Cinebench R15 single-core. This is not a dominant performance gap; it is a consistent but slim advantage for Intel.

The use-case split is therefore not about raw performance tiers. The data shows two 8-core, 16-thread processors with nearly identical Cinebench outputs. The differentiation lies elsewhere. The Xeon Gold 6334 is positioned as a server or workstation part with eight-channel DDR4 memory support and a rated memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, while the Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G is a desktop processor with dual-channel memory and 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth. For memory-bound workloads, the Xeon's platform advantages are substantial, even if the Cinebench scores do not reflect it.

The Ryzen part counters with integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics, a feature the Xeon lacks entirely. Systems that require a display output without a discrete GPU would favor the AMD processor. The Ryzen also has a much higher boost clock at 4.40 GHz versus 3.70 GHz, although the benchmark results do not translate that clock advantage into a Cinebench win.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies and manufacturing ecosystems. The Intel Xeon Gold 6334 uses the Ice Lake-SP architecture on Intel's 10 nm process node, produced at Intel's own foundry. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G uses the Zen 2 architecture, specifically the Renoir codename, built on TSMC's 7 nm process node.

Core counts are identical at 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks match at 3.60 GHz for both. The boost clock diverges significantly: the AMD reaches 4.40 GHz while the Intel stops at 3.70 GHz. Thermal design power tells a different story, with the Intel part rated at 165 watts and the AMD part at just 65 watts. This is a 100-watt gap in rated power consumption.

Cache hierarchies differ notably. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core. The Intel part has 1 MB of L2 cache per core, while the AMD has 512 KB per core. L3 cache is 18 MB shared on the Xeon versus 8 MB on the Ryzen. The Intel processor has more than double the L3 capacity.

Memory architecture is a major differentiator. The Xeon supports eight-channel DDR4 with a theoretical bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. The Ryzen supports dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Intel part provides Gen 4 with 64 lanes (CPU only), while the AMD provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes.

The AMD processor integrates Radeon Vega 8 graphics, making it a complete APU solution. The Intel Xeon has no integrated graphics. The AMD chip contains 9,800 million transistors on a 156 mm² die. The Intel die size and transistor count are not recorded.

Sockets differ completely: the Xeon uses Intel Socket 4189, while the Ryzen uses AMD Socket AM4. The Xeon is classified as server or workstation, the Ryzen as desktop. The Ryzen is part of the 4000 series, while the Xeon belongs to the Xeon Gold generation under Ice Lake-SP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data includes six Cinebench comparisons, and the Intel Xeon Gold 6334 wins all of them. The margins are tight but uniform.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 1757 against the Ryzen's 1734, a 1.3% advantage. In R15 single-core, the Xeon scores 247 against 244, a 1.2% edge. Moving to R20, the multi-core result is 7322 for Intel versus 7225 for AMD, again a 1.3% delta. The R20 single-core test shows 1033 versus 1019, a 1.4% lead.

The R23 results follow the same pattern. Multi-core: 17435 for the Xeon, 17204 for the Ryzen, a 1.3% difference. Single-core: 2461 versus 2428, a 1.4% gap. The consistency of these margins across different Cinebench versions suggests a stable performance relationship rather than workload-specific variation.

The Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G has additional Geekbench results that are not part of the head-to-head suite: a multi-core score of 7547 and a single-core score of 1628. The Xeon Gold 6334 has no recorded Geekbench scores, so no direct comparison is possible in that test.

The average benchmark scores place the Xeon at 5043 and the Ryzen at 4879. The Xeon sits at the 60th percentile among all CPUs, while the Ryzen sits at the 59th. The Xeon's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-9820X at 5049 (0.1% ahead), the Intel Core i9-12900TE at 5050 (0.1% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE at 5070 (0.5% ahead), and the Intel Xeon W-2155 at 5072 (0.6% ahead). The Ryzen's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon Gold 5315Y at 4887 (0.2% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 7 4700GE at 4836 (0.9% behind), the AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS at 4827 (1.1% behind), and the Intel Xeon W-1290 at 4932 (1.1% ahead).

The head-to-head data shows the Xeon consistently ahead, but the rival comparison data puts both processors in a similar performance neighborhood. The Xeon's closest competitor, the Core i9-9820X, is essentially tied at 0.1% difference. The Ryzen's closest competitor, the Xeon Gold 5315Y, is also within 0.2%.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core Cinebench tests?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 6334 wins all three multi-core tests. It scores 1757 in R15, 7322 in R20, and 17435 in R23, compared to the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G's 1734, 7225, and 17204 respectively. The margins are 1.3% in each case.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G have any benchmark wins?

A: No. Across the six recorded head-to-head Cinebench tests, the Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G records zero wins. The Intel Xeon Gold 6334 wins all six.

Q: How do the memory systems compare?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 6334 supports eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G supports dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s. Both support ECC memory.

Q: Does either processor have integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G includes Radeon Vega 8 integrated graphics. The Intel Xeon Gold 6334 has no integrated graphics.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G boosts to 4.40 GHz, while the Intel Xeon Gold 6334 boosts to 3.70 GHz. Despite the lower boost clock, the Intel part wins every Cinebench comparison.

Q: How do the overall average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 6334 has an average benchmark score of 5043, placing it at the 60th percentile of all CPUs. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G has an average score of 4879, placing it at the 59th percentile.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward selection for raw Cinebench performance: the Intel Xeon Gold 6334. It wins every shared benchmark by a small but consistent margin. Its 1.3% to 1.4% advantages across multi-core and single-core tests are not transformative, but they are uniform.

The platform considerations are where the choice becomes consequential. The Xeon Gold 6334 offers eight-channel memory with 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth, PCIe Gen 4 with 64 lanes, and a 165-watt TDP. It is built for server and workstation environments where memory throughput and expansion capacity matter more than the modest Cinebench edge. The Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G offers dual-channel memory at 51.2 GB/s, PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, and a 65-watt TDP. It includes integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics, which the Xeon cannot provide.

For users building a desktop system with no discrete GPU, the Ryzen 7 PRO 4750G is the only option with a display output. For users assembling a server or workstation with high memory bandwidth requirements and PCIe expansion needs, the Xeon Gold 6334 is the data-backed choice. The benchmark scores alone do not separate these processors meaningfully, but the platform features do. The Xeon wins the performance tests, while the Ryzen wins on power efficiency and integrated graphics. The recorded data shows a 100-watt TDP difference and a 3.70 GHz versus 4.40 GHz boost clock gap, yet the Cinebench results stay within 1.4% of each other. That is the defining characteristic of this comparison: two very different platforms producing nearly identical scores, with the Intel part edging ahead in every measured test.