AMD EPYC 4244P vs Intel Core i5-13600T Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i5-13600T and AMD EPYC 4244P are separated by a razor-thin margin in overall performance, but the benchmark results reveal a clear split. The Intel part wins 13 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, while the AMD EPYC takes 4. However, the magnitude of those wins varies dramatically.

In the Cinebench suite, the Intel Core i5-13600T holds a consistent 2.1% advantage across every test. That includes R15 multicore (2375 vs 2327), R15 single-core (335 vs 328), R20 multicore (9899 vs 9697), R20 single-core (1397 vs 1368), R23 multicore (23571 vs 23089), and R23 single-core (3327 vs 3259). These are tight margins, indicating the two processors are close in both lightly-threaded and heavily-threaded rendering workloads.

The Intel chip's biggest victory comes in floating-point math, where it scores 70152 against the EPYC's 45546. That is a 54% lead, the largest delta in the entire comparison. Integer math also favors Intel by 22.3%, with scores of 96299 and 78709 respectively. Data compression shows an 11.7% advantage for Intel (337893 vs 302606), and data encryption adds a 6% edge (19320 vs 18232).

The AMD EPYC 4244P counters with a dominant showing in prime number finding. Its score of 187 crushes Intel's 82, a 56.1% difference that flips the expected narrative. Physics performance also goes to AMD by 35% (1981 vs 1287). In extended instructions, AMD leads by 6.8% (22149 vs 20651), and random string sorting favors AMD by 4.3% (38048 vs 36413).

In multithreaded PassMark, the Intel chip edges ahead by just 1.1% (27098 vs 26797). Single-thread PassMark is nearly identical, with Intel winning by 0.5% (3728 vs 3710). The overall picture is that Intel dominates math-heavy and compression workloads, while AMD wins specialized instruction and physics tasks, often by large margins.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different design philosophies. The Intel Core i5-13600T is built on Raptor Lake-S, a 10 nm architecture manufactured by Intel itself. It packs 14 cores and 20 threads, a hybrid configuration that mixes performance and efficiency cores. The AMD EPYC 4244P uses Zen 4 (codenamed Raphael), fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process, with 6 cores and 12 threads.

Process node and transistor counts highlight the manufacturing gap. The AMD chip contains 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die, while Intel's die measures 215 mm². The smaller, denser AMD design is a product of its more advanced node, though Intel compensates with raw core count.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. Intel provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. AMD offers 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. The EPYC's larger L3 pool gives it more shared cache, which can benefit certain workloads, but Intel's per-core L1 and L2 allocations are larger.

Memory support also diverges. The Intel chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration. The AMD EPYC is DDR5-only, also dual-channel, but the database records its memory bandwidth at 83.2 GB/s, a figure not listed for Intel. Both support ECC memory, making either viable for error-sensitive computing.

PCIe connectivity is another differentiator. Intel provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU-attached lanes. AMD offers Gen 5 with 28 CPU-attached lanes, a significant increase for expansion-heavy server or workstation builds. Integrated graphics differ as well: Intel uses UHD Graphics 770, while AMD includes Radeon Graphics.

Clock speeds show the AMD chip running higher. Its base clock is 3.80 GHz with a boost of 5.10 GHz, compared to Intel's 1.80 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. Despite the lower base clock, Intel's hybrid core design allows it to match or beat AMD in most benchmarks. Power targets also differ, with Intel rated at 35 W TDP and AMD at 65 W TDP, though the database does not record performance-per-watt results.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-13600T is the clear choice for compute-heavy, math-intensive workloads. Its 54% lead in floating-point math and 22.3% advantage in integer math make it superior for scientific simulations, financial modeling, and any task that stresses arithmetic throughput. The 11.7% edge in data compression and 6% lead in data encryption also favor Intel for database operations, file archiving, and secure data processing. Rendering workloads, shown by the Cinebench suite, all go to Intel by 2.1%, making it the better pick for 3D rendering and video encoding.

The AMD EPYC 4244P wins in more specialized areas. The 56.1% advantage in prime number finding suggests strong integer-based algorithmic performance, which can benefit cryptography and number-crunching applications. The 35% lead in physics simulation makes it attractive for gaming physics or certain engineering simulations that rely on the PassMark physics test. Extended instructions favor AMD by 6.8%, indicating better performance in workloads that use advanced CPU instruction sets. Random string sorting also goes to AMD by 4.3%, a niche but relevant metric for text processing and data manipulation.

For general threading, the two are nearly identical. PassMark multithread scores sit within 1.1% of each other, and single-thread performance differs by only 0.5%. This means users with mixed workloads will not see a dramatic difference in everyday tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i5-13600T has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the AMD EPYC 4244P has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: How do the processors compare in the latest Cinebench R23 test?

A: Intel wins R23 multicore by 2.1% (23571 vs 23089) and R23 single-core by 2.1% (3327 vs 3259).

Q: Which chip is better for floating-point calculations?

A: The Intel Core i5-13600T is far ahead, scoring 70152 in PassMark floating-point math versus 45546 for the AMD EPYC, a 54% advantage.

Q: Does the AMD EPYC win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins 4 of 17 comparisons, including prime number finding by 56.1%, physics by 35%, extended instructions by 6.8%, and random string sorting by 4.3%.

Q: What memory does each processor support?

A: Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode, while AMD supports DDR5 only, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD EPYC 4244P boosts to 5.10 GHz, while the Intel Core i5-13600T boosts to 4.80 GHz.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but nuanced conclusion. The Intel Core i5-13600T is the stronger overall processor, winning 13 of 17 benchmarks and holding an 85th percentile ranking versus the EPYC's 84th. Its average benchmark score of 35305 also exceeds the EPYC's 34220. For users who prioritize math throughput, compression, encryption, and rendering, Intel is the definitive pick.

The AMD EPYC 4244P is not without merit. Its wins in physics, prime number finding, and extended instructions make it superior for specific workloads. The larger L3 cache and higher boost clock support its specialized strengths. The 65 W TDP and server/workstation market segment suggest it targets a different use case than Intel's desktop-oriented chip.

The deciding factor comes down to workload type. General-purpose computing, content creation, and data processing favor Intel. Specialized algorithmic tasks and physics simulation favor AMD. For most users, the Intel Core i5-13600T offers broader performance across the benchmark suite, while the AMD EPYC 4244P excels in narrower niches.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-13600T | AMD EPYC 4244P |

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

| Series | Core 13th Gen | EPYC 4004 series |

| Manufacturer | Intel | AMD |

| Cores | 14 | 6 |

| Threads | 20 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 1.80 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | AMD Socket AM5 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Zen 4 |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-S | Raphael |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 6,570 million |

| Die Size | 215 mm² | 71 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 24 MB (shared) | 32 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 83.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 28 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | Radeon Graphics |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | 2023-01-03 | 2024-05-20 |

| Launch MSRP | $255 | $229 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | No |

| Part Number | SRMBL | 100-000001480 |