CPU Comparison

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 and Intel Xeon 6756E represent opposite ends of the server and embedded computing spectrum, yet benchmark results reveal a surprisingly competitive overall picture. The Xeon 6756E, a massive 128-core Sierra Forest part, dominates the majority of tests, but the Ryzen Embedded V2546, a compact 6-core Zen 2 chip, secures decisive victories in specific workloads that demonstrate the importance of architectural efficiency over raw core counts.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Xeon 6756E claims victory in 15 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, yet the margin of victory varies dramatically across test types. In the Cinebench suite, the Xeon’s advantage is remarkably consistent, with the AMD part trailing by 15.6% in R15 multicore (827 vs 980) and R20 multicore (3446 vs 4085), and a nearly identical 15.6% deficit in R23 multicore (8207 vs 9728). Single-core Cinebench results follow the same pattern, with the Xeon leading by 15.9% in R15 (138 vs 116) and 15.7% in R23 (1373 vs 1158). This uniformity across both single and multi-threaded Cinebench tests suggests a fundamental per-thread performance advantage for the Intel architecture rather than a scaling benefit from its 128 cores.

The PassMark suite tells a more nuanced story. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 posts its largest win in extended instructions, scoring 8799 against the Xeon’s 6596, a commanding 33.4% advantage. The AMD chip also wins data compression decisively, scoring 136097 versus 123443, a 10.3% margin. These are not trivial victories; they represent workloads where the Ryzen’s Zen 2 architecture with its per-core L2 cache configuration delivers superior throughput per clock.

However, the Xeon 6756E’s wins in PassMark tests are often substantial. The largest disparity appears in find prime numbers, where Intel scores 133 against AMD’s 22, an 83.5% gap that reflects the massive advantage of 128 cores in this embarrassingly parallel integer workload. Physics simulation shows a 69.9% Intel lead (1463 vs 441), and floating point math favors Intel by 17.4% (22451 vs 18534). The Xeon also edges out the AMD chip in integer math, though barely, at 30806 versus 30739, a mere 0.2% difference. Data encryption goes to Intel by 4.3% (8409 vs 8046), and random string sorting favors Intel by 12.1% (15847 vs 13926). Single-thread PassMark scores are nearly identical, with Intel leading by just 2.2% (1646 vs 1609).

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 establishes its territory in two specific PassMark categories: extended instructions and data compression. The 33.4% lead in extended instructions indicates that this processor handles SIMD and specialized instruction set extensions with notably higher efficiency than the Xeon. For workloads that rely heavily on AVX-512 or similar vectorized operations, common in media encoding, scientific simulations, and certain database operations, the Ryzen’s architecture proves more responsive per clock. The 10.3% advantage in data compression suggests that the Zen 2 core design, with its 512 KB per-core L2 cache, excels at the pattern recognition and memory access patterns typical of compression algorithms.

The Intel Xeon 6756E’s wins are broadly distributed but particularly pronounced in integer-heavy and physics-based workloads. The 83.5% margin in prime number finding is the clearest indicator of its strength: this test scales almost perfectly with core count, and the Xeon’s 128 cores overwhelm the Ryzen’s 6 cores. The 69.9% lead in PassMark physics similarly reflects parallel computation scaling. The Xeon also demonstrates consistent single-thread superiority, leading by 15.9% in Cinebench R15 single-core and 2.2% in PassMark single-thread, indicating that its Sierra Forest cores, despite a lower 1.80 GHz base clock, deliver more instructions per cycle than the Ryzen’s higher-clocked Zen 2 cores.

For mixed workloads, the Xeon’s 15.6% lead in PassMark multithread (11445 vs 9656) and its wins in data encryption and random string sorting position it as the more versatile processor for server environments. The AMD chip’s wins, while fewer, are substantial enough to matter for specialized embedded applications where compression and extended instruction throughput are critical.

Architecture Differences

The two processors could not be more different in design philosophy. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 uses the Zen 2 architecture on TSMC’s 7 nm process, packing 9,800 million transistors into a 156 mm² die. It features 6 cores and 12 threads with a 3.00 GHz base clock and 3.95 GHz boost clock. Its cache hierarchy includes 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. The chip supports DDR4 memory over a dual-channel bus with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, and includes Radeon Graphics with 384 shader processors. It operates within a 35 W TDP and uses AMD Socket FP6.

The Intel Xeon 6756E adopts the Sierra Forest architecture on Intel’s 5 nm process, with a massive 578 mm² die. It contains 128 cores and 128 threads, notably without hyper-threading, running at a 1.80 GHz base clock and 2.60 GHz boost clock. The cache design is radically different: 96 KB L1 per core, 4 MB L2 per module, and 96 MB shared L3. Memory support jumps to DDR5 across an eight-channel bus, delivering 409.6 GB/s bandwidth, eight times the Ryzen’s throughput. The Xeon also offers PCIe Gen 5 with 88 lanes versus the Ryzen’s PCIe Gen 3 with 20 lanes, and it has no integrated graphics. Its TDP is 225 W, and it uses Intel Socket 4710.

The process node difference (7 nm vs 5 nm) and transistor density reflect the different market targets: the Ryzen is optimized for power efficiency in embedded systems, while the Xeon prioritizes raw throughput in server racks. The Xeon’s lack of SMT means its 128 threads equal its core count, whereas the Ryzen doubles its 6 cores to 12 threads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 14336, compared to the Intel Xeon 6756E’s 14163. The AMD chip also edges out the Intel part in percentile ranking, sitting at the 69th percentile versus the Xeon’s 68th.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Xeon 6756E leads in all single-core tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 1373 against AMD’s 1158, a 15.7% advantage. In PassMark single-thread, Intel scores 1646 versus AMD’s 1609, a 2.2% lead.

Q: What is the most dramatic performance difference between the two?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Intel Xeon 6756E scores 133 against the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546’s 22, representing an 83.5% difference. This test heavily favors the Xeon’s 128 cores.

Q: Does the AMD processor have any significant advantages?

A: Yes, the AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 wins PassMark extended instructions by 33.4% (8799 vs 6596) and PassMark data compression by 10.3% (136097 vs 123443). These are substantial margins in specialized workloads.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth capabilities of each?

A: The Intel Xeon 6756E supports DDR5 over an eight-channel bus with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 supports DDR4 over a dual-channel bus with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, making the Xeon eight times higher in theoretical memory throughput.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon 6756E has 128 cores and 128 threads. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 has 6 cores and 12 threads. This represents a 122-core and 116-thread difference in favor of Intel.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 | Intel Xeon 6756E |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 6 | 128 |

| Threads | 12 | 128 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 1.80 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.95 GHz | 2.60 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 225 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP6 | Intel Socket 4710 |

| Architecture | Zen 2 | Sierra Forest |

| Codename | Renoir | Sierra Forest |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 5 nm |

| Die Size | 156 mm² | 578 mm² |

| Transistors | 9,800 million | N/A |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 4 MB (per module) |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 96 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Eight-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 409.6 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 88 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon Graphics 384SP | N/A |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | 2020-11-09 | 2024-06-02 |

| Launch MSRP | N/A | $8428 |

| Part Number | 100-000000246 | SRPFX |