AMD EPYC 4244P vs Intel Core i7-13700T Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Core i7-13700T and AMD EPYC 4244P are positioned at nearly the same overall performance level, with the Intel part edging ahead in most recorded benchmarks. The database shows the Core i7-13700T wins 13 of 17 head-to-head tests, while the EPYC 4244P takes 4. Their average benchmark scores are very close, 35403 for the Intel part versus 34220 for the AMD part, a difference of about 3.5%. The Intel chip also sits at the 85th percentile among all CPUs, while the EPYC sits at the 84th.

For users prioritizing raw multi-threaded throughput and data compression, the Intel Core i7-13700T is the stronger pick. It leads in every Cinebench multi-core test, in PassMark multithread, integer math, floating point math, data compression, and data encryption. Its 16 cores and 24 threads give it a clear structural advantage in heavily parallel workloads, even though its base clock is far lower than the EPYC's.

For users focused on single-core efficiency per thread, extended instruction throughput, prime number finding, physics simulation, or random string sorting, the AMD EPYC 4244P wins specific workloads. It also offers ECC memory support, Gen 5 PCIe with 28 lanes, and a 5 nm process from TSMC, making it suitable for server or workstation environments where reliability and memory integrity matter more than peak multi-threaded scores. The EPYC's 65 W TDP is higher than the Intel's 35 W, but it delivers a higher boost clock of 5.10 GHz versus 4.90 GHz.

The verdict is straightforward: pick the Intel Core i7-13700T for desktop-centric, multi-threaded workloads and general productivity where its 30 MB L3 cache and 16-core count dominate. Pick the AMD EPYC 4244P for server or workstation tasks that demand ECC memory, more PCIe lanes, or where its Zen 4 architecture's instruction handling and physics performance matter more. Neither processor is a clear winner across the board, but the Intel part wins more tests and has a higher average score.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i7-13700T uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-S, built on a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry. It has 16 cores and 24 threads, with a die size of 257 mm². The AMD EPYC 4244P uses Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Raphael, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a die size of 71 mm² and 6,570 million transistors.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. The Intel part allocates 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core, with a shared 30 MB L3 cache. The AMD part allocates 64 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with a shared 32 MB L3 cache. So while the EPYC has more total L3 cache (32 MB versus 30 MB), the Intel part has larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations.

Memory support also diverges. The Intel Core i7-13700T supports both DDR4 and DDR5, with a dual-channel memory bus. The AMD EPYC 4244P supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, but the database records a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s for the EPYC, while no bandwidth figure is listed for the Intel part. The EPYC supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not.

PCIe capabilities favor the AMD part. The EPYC 4244P provides Gen 5 PCIe with 28 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel part provides Gen 5 PCIe with 20 lanes from the CPU. Both have integrated graphics: the Intel part has UHD Graphics 770, and the AMD part has Radeon Graphics.

Production status is active for both, and both are unlocked in terms of multiplier, though the EPYC's multiplier is locked. The Intel part has a launch date of 2023-01-03, while the EPYC launched on 2024-05-20. The Intel part's launch MSRP is $384, and the EPYC's launch MSRP is $229. The Intel part is classified as Desktop market segment, while the EPYC is Server/Workstation.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows a consistent, if narrow, Intel advantage. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Intel scores 2343 versus the EPYC's 2327, a 0.7% lead. In R15 single-core, Intel leads 330 to 328, a 0.6% margin. R20 multi-core repeats the pattern: Intel 9764, EPYC 9697, a 0.7% lead. R20 single-core: Intel 1378, EPYC 1368, a 0.7% lead. R23 multi-core: Intel 23248, EPYC 23089, a 0.7% lead. R23 single-core: Intel 3282, EPYC 3259, a 0.7% lead. Across all six Cinebench tests, the Intel part wins with the same narrow margin, indicating that its additional cores and threads translate into a measurable but not overwhelming multi-core advantage, while its single-core performance is essentially on par with the EPYC.

PassMark multithread gives Intel a 5.3% win, scoring 28211 versus 26797. Single-thread performance also favors Intel, at 3821 versus 3710, a 3% lead. Integer math is a stronger Intel win: 105397 versus 78709, a 33.9% margin. Floating point math shows the largest Intel advantage, 73928 versus 45546, a 62.3% lead. Data compression goes to Intel by 8.3%, 327700 versus 302606. Data encryption favors Intel by 5.5%, 19230 versus 18232.

The AMD EPYC 4244P wins four tests. Extended instructions: 22149 versus 19306, a 12.8% advantage for AMD. Find prime numbers: 187 versus 127, a 32.1% lead for AMD. Physics: 1981 versus 1769, a 10.7% lead for AMD. Random string sorting: 38048 versus 34939, an 8.2% lead for AMD.

These results reveal a clear pattern. The Intel part dominates in arithmetic-heavy and compression workloads, thanks to its 16 cores and larger per-core cache. The AMD part excels in specific instruction-heavy tasks, prime number sieving, physics calculations, and string sorting, despite having only 6 cores and 12 threads. The EPYC's higher boost clock of 5.10 GHz and its Zen 4 architecture likely explain its wins in these latency-sensitive or instruction-rich tests.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors:

• Cores: Intel 16, AMD 6
• Threads: Intel 24, AMD 12
• Base clock: Intel 1400.00 MHz, AMD 3800.00 MHz
• Boost clock: Intel 4.90 GHz, AMD 5.10 GHz
• TDP: Intel 35 W, AMD 65 W
• Socket: Intel Socket 1700, AMD Socket AM5
• Architecture: Raptor Lake, Zen 4
• Codename: Raptor Lake-S, Raphael
• Generation: Core i7 (Raptor Lake), EPYC (Zen 4 (Raphael))
• Process node: 10 nm, 5 nm
• Foundry: Intel, TSMC
• Die size: 257 mm², 71 mm²
• Transistors: not listed for Intel, 6,570 million for AMD
• L1 cache per core: 80 KB, 64 KB
• L2 cache per core: 2 MB, 1 MB
• L3 cache shared: 30 MB, 32 MB
• Memory support: DDR4 and DDR5, DDR5 only
• Memory bandwidth: not listed for Intel, 83.2 GB/s for AMD
• ECC memory: false for Intel, true for AMD
• PCIe lanes: 20 for Intel, 28 for AMD
• Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 770, Radeon Graphics
• Market segment: Desktop, Server/Workstation
• Release date: 2023-01-03, 2024-05-20
• Launch MSRP: $384, $229
• Multiplier unlocked: true for Intel, false for AMD
• Part number: not listed for Intel, 100-000001480 for AMD

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i7-13700T has 16 cores and 24 threads, while the AMD EPYC 4244P has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD EPYC 4244P boosts to 5.10 GHz, while the Intel Core i7-13700T boosts to 4.90 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 4244P supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i7-13700T does not.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes?

A: The AMD EPYC 4244P provides 28 Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel Core i7-13700T provides 20 Gen 5 lanes.

Q: In which benchmark does the Intel part have its largest advantage?

A: The Intel Core i7-13700T leads by 62.3% in PassMark floating point math, scoring 73928 versus the EPYC's 45546.

Q: In which benchmark does the AMD part have its largest advantage?

A: The AMD EPYC 4244P leads by 32.1% in PassMark find prime numbers, scoring 187 versus the Intel's 127.

Q: What is the overall average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i7-13700T has an average benchmark score of 35403, and the AMD EPYC 4244P has an average of 34220. The Intel part is at the 85th percentile of all CPUs, while the EPYC is at the 84th.