Intel Xeon 6300 vs. AMD EPYC 4005 SMT/HT Performance

Written by Michael Larabel in Processors on 23 June 2025 at 12:00 PM EDT. Page 7 of 7. 31 Comments.

In total I ran 69 multi-threaded benchmarks on both the Intel Xeon 6369P and AMD EPYC 4345P Supermicro servers for this comparison. When taking the geometric mean of all those raw performance benchmarks, the 8-core Xeon 6369P saw 1.21x the performance out of having SMT enabled compared to the baseline run of it disabled. Meanwhile the 8-core EPYC 4345P processor saw 1.32x the performance out of Simultaneous Multi-Threading on this Ubuntu 25.04 Linux server setup. At the same core counts, the Zen 5 based AMD EPYC 4005 series was showing greater benefit out of SMT than the flagship Xeon 6300 series processor.

Also fascinating to see was that the AMD EPYC 4345P even with SMT disabled was still faster than the Xeon 6369P with its full load-out thanks to the EPYC Grado CPU supporting AVX-512 and other advantages over the Xeon 6300 series that in turn is largely rehashed from the Xeon E-2400 series.

Across all 69 benchmarks in total, there wasn't any significant CPU power consumption difference for either the EPYC 4345P or Xeon 6369P. The EPYC 4345P was not only delivering better performance over the Xeon 6369P but it was doing so at lower power: 82 Watts on average compared to the Xeon 6369P at a 93 Watt average and a peak power consumption rate more than double.

Simultaneous Multi-Threading continues to prove to be very effective where supported (across all AMD Zen 5 CPUs but sadly dropped from the latest Intel Core Ultra processors on the desktop/mobile side) and especially under Linux and the plethora of multi-threaded workloads available. For cases where 8-cores + SMT/HT (16 threads) isn't enough, the AMD EPYC 4005 series also has the advantage over the Xeon 6300 series of having the 12-core EPYC 4465P and the 16-core EPYC 4545P and EPYC 4565P and EPYC 4585PX processors for up to 32 threads in this entry-level server CPU line-up.

31 Comments