AMD EPYC 4124P vs Intel Core i7-10700K Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split between the AMD EPYC 4124P and Intel Core i7-10700K is not a simple matter of one being universally faster. The Intel part claims 12 of the 17 head-to-head tests, while the AMD EPYC 4124P takes 5. The pattern is clear: Intel wins most heavily in traditional throughput and compression workloads, while AMD wins decisively in encryption, prime number calculation, physics simulation, and single-threaded PassMark performance.

For a server or workstation buyer, the EPYC 4124P's wins matter more than the raw count suggests. Data encryption shows a 79.8% advantage for AMD, a massive gap in a workload that matters for secure server operations. Find prime numbers, a test sensitive to instruction efficiency, goes to AMD by 61.8%. Physics simulation favors the EPYC by 16.5%. These are not marginal differences; they represent architectural strengths in specific computational patterns.

The Intel Core i7-10700K dominates in data compression, random string sorting, floating point math, integer math, and extended instructions. The compression gap is particularly stark at 30.6%, and random string sorting shows a 33.8% deficit for the EPYC. These are classic multi-threaded, memory-bandwidth-hungry workloads where the Intel part's 8 cores and 16 threads simply outmuscle the 4-core EPYC.

The Cinebench results are remarkably close. Across R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core, the Intel part wins by roughly 3% every time. This suggests that in pure rendering tasks, the two processors are nearly interchangeable, with the Intel chip holding a slight edge that could come down to clock behavior or memory latency.

The PassMark single-thread test is the standout AMD victory. The EPYC 4124P scores 3897 against Intel's 3043, a 28.1% lead. This is a major reversal from the Cinebench single-core results, where Intel leads by about 3%. The difference likely comes from the test methodology: PassMark's single-thread test exercises different instruction patterns than Cinebench's rendering workload.

FAQ

Q: Is the AMD EPYC 4124P faster than the Intel Core i7-10700K in any benchmark?

A: Yes. The EPYC 4124P wins 5 head-to-head tests: data encryption (11630 vs 6468, +79.8%), find prime numbers (89 vs 55, +61.8%), physics (1087 vs 933, +16.5%), and PassMark single-thread (3897 vs 3043, +28.1%, recorded twice in the database).

Q: How close are the two in Cinebench multi-core performance?

A: Very close. The Intel Core i7-10700K leads by 2.9% in R23 multi-core (15727 vs 15264), 3% in R20 multi-core (6605 vs 6410), and 3% in R15 multi-core (1585 vs 1538). Despite having double the cores, Intel's advantage is under 3% in every Cinebench multi-core test.

Q: Which processor has better single-thread performance?

A: It depends on the benchmark. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel leads by 3% (2220 vs 2154). In PassMark single-thread, AMD leads by 28.1% (3897 vs 3043). The two test suites measure different aspects of single-thread execution.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark data encryption, where the AMD EPYC 4124P scores 11630 compared to Intel's 6468, a 79.8% advantage. The second largest is in random string sorting, where Intel leads by 33.8% (36633 vs 24259).

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-10700K have an advantage in multi-threaded workloads?

A: Generally yes, but it is modest. The Intel part wins PassMark multithread by 2.5% (18609 vs 18139), data compression by 30.6%, floating point math by 23.7%, and integer math by 20.7%. However, the Cinebench multi-core margins are only around 3%.

Q: How does the EPYC 4124P compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The EPYC 4124P sits at the 76th percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 23167. It trails the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V by 0.2%, the Intel Core i9-11900F by 0.4%, the AMD Ryzen 7 5800H by 0.5%, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 266V by 0.6%. All deltas are under 1%.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most important result is the data encryption test. The AMD EPYC 4124P scores 11630 against Intel's 6468, a 79.8% lead. This is the single largest margin in either direction across all 17 tests. For workloads involving encryption, the EPYC is in a different class entirely.

The find prime numbers test shows a 61.8% advantage for AMD (89 vs 55). This test is known to be sensitive to branch prediction and integer arithmetic efficiency. The Zen 4 architecture clearly handles this pattern far better than Comet Lake.

PassMark physics simulation goes to AMD by 16.5% (1087 vs 933). This is a notable win because physics workloads often scale with core count, yet the 4-core EPYC beats the 8-core Intel part here. The PassMark single-thread test also favors AMD by 28.1% (3897 vs 3043).

Intel's biggest wins are in memory-intensive and throughput-oriented tasks. Random string sorting shows Intel at 36633 versus AMD's 24259, a 33.8% margin. Data compression gives Intel a 30.6% lead (295418 vs 204926). Floating point math favors Intel by 23.7% (41306 vs 31518), and integer math by 20.7% (66642 vs 52855).

Extended instructions go to Intel by 22.4% (19387 vs 15049). This test exercises SIMD and specialized instruction paths where Intel's mature Comet Lake implementation appears stronger despite the older process node.

The Cinebench results deserve special attention because they are so consistent. Every single Cinebench test, whether R15, R20, or R23, and whether single-core or multi-core, shows Intel winning by between 2.9% and 3.1%. The consistency suggests a fundamental clock-for-clock or memory-latency advantage rather than a workload-specific effect.

PassMark multithread is the closest overall test at 2.5% (18609 vs 18139). The EPYC 4124P nearly matches the Intel part despite having half the cores and threads. This indicates that per-thread efficiency on the EPYC is substantially higher.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ sharply. The AMD EPYC 4124P has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i7-10700K has 8 cores and 16 threads. This is a 2x difference in parallel resources.

Both processors share the same base clock of 3.80 GHz and the same boost clock of 5.10 GHz. That is where the similarity ends.

The thermal design power differs significantly: the EPYC 4124P is rated at 65 watts, while the Intel part is rated at 125 watts. The EPYC delivers near-parity Cinebench performance at roughly half the power envelope.

Memory support diverges completely. The EPYC uses DDR5 with dual-channel configuration and 83.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part uses DDR4 with dual-channel configuration and 46.9 GB/s bandwidth. The EPYC supports ECC memory; the Intel part does not.

PCIe capabilities differ by generation and lane count. The EPYC provides Gen 5 with 28 lanes from the CPU. The Intel part provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. This is a major platform-level difference for expansion and storage.

The sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket AM5 for the EPYC, Intel Socket 1200 for the Core i7-10700K.

The Intel part has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking; the EPYC does not. The EPYC includes Radeon Graphics as integrated graphics, while the Intel part includes UHD Graphics 630.

The EPYC was released on May 20, 2024, with a launch MSRP of $149. The Intel part was released on April 29, 2020. The Intel part has no launch MSRP recorded in the database.

Architecture Differences

The AMD EPYC 4124P is built on Zen 4 architecture with the Raphael codename, part of the EPYC 4004 series. It uses a 5 nm process from TSMC with 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die. The Intel Core i7-10700K uses Comet Lake architecture on a 14 nm process from Intel. No transistor count or die size is recorded for the Intel part.

Cache layouts differ substantially. Both have 64 KB L1 per core. The EPYC has 1 MB L2 per core, while the Intel part has 256 KB L2 per core. The EPYC has 32 MB shared L3, while the Intel part has 16 MB shared L3. The EPYC's larger per-core L2 and larger total L3 contribute to its strong single-thread PassMark showing.

The EPYC's generation is listed as "EPYC (Zen 4 (Raphael))". The Intel part's generation is "Core i7 (Comet Lake)". The EPYC is manufactured by TSMC, while the Intel part is manufactured by Intel's own fabs.

The EPYC targets the server and workstation market segment, while the Intel part targets desktop. This positioning explains the ECC support, PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and higher memory bandwidth on the AMD side.

The Intel part is listed as active production status, as is the EPYC. Both remain available in the channel.

The Verdict

The data shows two processors with opposite strengths. If the workload involves encryption, prime number calculation, physics simulation, or single-threaded PassMark-style tasks, the AMD EPYC 4124P is the clear choice. Its 79.8% encryption lead and 61.8% prime number lead are decisive. The 28.1% PassMark single-thread advantage also matters for lightly threaded applications.

If the workload involves data compression, string sorting, floating point math, integer math, or extended instructions, the Intel Core i7-10700K wins by wide margins. The 30.6% compression lead and 33.8% string sorting lead indicate strong memory throughput and multi-thread scaling. The 22.4% extended instructions lead suggests better SIMD execution.

For Cinebench rendering, the choice is nearly arbitrary. The Intel part wins every Cinebench test by approximately 3%, but that margin is small enough to be considered parity for practical purposes. The EPYC achieves this with 65 watts versus 125 watts and half the cores.

The overall average benchmark scores are close: 23167 for the EPYC versus 22230 for the Intel part. The EPYC sits at the 76th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel part sits at the 75th percentile. The EPYC's nearest rivals are all within 0.6% of its average score, indicating tight competition at this performance tier.

For a server or workstation build where ECC memory, PCIe Gen 5, and encryption performance matter, the EPYC 4124P is the data-backed choice. For a desktop build focused on compression, math throughput, and multi-threaded productivity, the Intel Core i7-10700K has the edge in most measured tests.

The tiebreaker is platform. The EPYC offers DDR5, 83.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, 28 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and ECC support. The Intel part offers DDR4, 46.9 GB/s bandwidth, 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, and no ECC. The EPYC's platform advantages align with its server positioning, while the Intel part's desktop heritage shows in its overclocking support and UHD Graphics 630.

Choose the EPYC for secure, memory-intensive, single-thread-sensitive server workloads. Choose the Intel part for general desktop throughput and compression-heavy tasks. The recorded benchmark data supports both picks depending on which set of workloads matters more.