AMD EPYC 4464P vs Intel Core i7-13790F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a decisive overall victory for the AMD EPYC 4464P, which wins 13 of the 17 recorded benchmarks. The Intel Core i7-13790F takes only 4 wins, but those wins are concentrated in specific workloads where the Intel part's architecture holds an advantage.

The most lopsided result in the entire comparison is the PassMark find prime numbers test. The EPYC 4464P scores 343 versus 207 for the Core i7-13790F, a massive 65.7% advantage. This is a dramatic gap that points to fundamental differences in how the two processors handle integer-heavy, branch-dependent workloads. No other test comes close to this margin.

Across the Cinebench suite, the AMD processor is consistently ahead by 13.6% in both single-core and multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 4464P scores 40,215 against 35,404 for the Intel part. The single-core R23 result shows 5,677 versus 4,998. The R15 and R20 variants mirror this pattern exactly: 13.6% in every Cinebench test, whether single-threaded or multi-threaded. This uniformity suggests the advantage is not workload-specific but rather a general per-clock efficiency lead.

The EPYC 4464P also wins the PassMark data encryption test by 13%, scoring 35,816 against 31,703. Extended instructions follow at 39,359 versus 34,828, also a 13% margin. Random string sorting shows a 19.8% advantage for the AMD chip (70,200 versus 58,607), indicating strong memory subsystem performance. Data compression is closer, with the EPYC 4464P winning by just 1.2% (574,304 versus 567,473). Integer math goes to AMD by 5.9% (160,410 versus 151,416), and the PassMark multi-thread score favors the EPYC 4464P by 6.2% (47,514 versus 44,737).

Where the Intel Core i7-13790F pushes back is in floating-point math. It scores 110,512 versus 93,090 for the EPYC 4464P, a 15.8% win. This is the largest margin of victory for either side outside of the prime number test. The physics test also goes to Intel, 3,017 versus 2,873, a 4.8% edge. The single-thread PassMark score narrowly favors the Core i7-13790F at 4,212 versus 4,146, a 1.6% difference. That is a small but real win for Intel in raw single-thread throughput as measured by PassMark.

However, the single-core Cinebench results tell a different story. The EPYC 4464P leads by 13.6% in Cinebench R23 single-core (5,677 versus 4,998). The discrepancy between PassMark single-thread and Cinebench single-core suggests the two test suites stress different aspects of the pipeline. The database shows the AMD part winning the more demanding rendering workload, while Intel edges out the PassMark synthetic.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD EPYC 4464P is built on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Raphael, using TSMC's 5 nm process with 13,140 million transistors spread across a dual-die design of 2x 71 mm². The Intel Core i7-13790F uses Raptor Lake architecture on Intel's 10 nm process with a monolithic 257 mm² die.

Core counts differ significantly. The EPYC 4464P has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Core i7-13790F has 16 cores and 24 threads. Both parts support the same thread count, but Intel achieves this with more physical cores. The Intel design uses a hybrid architecture, presumably with performance and efficiency cores, although the database does not specify the exact core mix. The AMD part uses a uniform core design across all 12 cores.

Clock speeds favor AMD on paper. The EPYC 4464P has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The Core i7-13790F has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The much lower base clock for Intel suggests significant reliance on turbo behavior to reach performance targets. Both processors have a TDP of 65 watts, an identical power envelope.

Cache configurations are starkly different. The AMD chip has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 64 MB of L3 cache. The Intel chip has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and only 33 MB of shared L3. The AMD part has nearly double the total L3 cache, which helps explain its strong showing in random string sorting and data compression.

Memory support diverges as well. The EPYC 4464P supports DDR5 only, with dual-channel memory and 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core i7-13790F supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, though the database does not list a bandwidth figure. The AMD part supports ECC memory; the Intel part does not. This is a critical differentiator for server and workstation use.

PCIe connectivity favors AMD: 28 Gen 5 lanes versus 20 Gen 5 lanes for Intel. The AMD chip also includes integrated Radeon Graphics, while the Intel part has no integrated graphics listed. Socket compatibility differs entirely: the EPYC 4464P uses AMD Socket AM5, while the Core i7-13790F uses Intel Socket 1700. The AMD part is classified as a Server/Workstation processor, while the Intel part is a Desktop processor. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The process node advantage is clear. TSMC's 5 nm process versus Intel's 10 nm process gives AMD a density and efficiency edge that shows up in the benchmark data. The EPYC 4464P achieves higher performance in most tests while consuming the same 65 W TDP as the Intel part.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for most workloads. The AMD EPYC 4464P wins 13 of 17 benchmarks and holds a 2.8% average score advantage (64,823 versus 63,080). Its 13.6% lead across every Cinebench test indicates a consistent per-thread efficiency advantage, not just a multi-core scaling win. The massive 65.7% margin in prime number finding suggests the Zen 4 architecture handles branch-prediction-heavy integer workloads far better than Raptor Lake.

The Intel Core i7-13790F is the better choice only in specific scenarios. Its 15.8% win in floating-point math makes it the pick for workloads dominated by FP32 or FP64 arithmetic. The physics test win of 4.8% reinforces this pattern. The narrow PassMark single-thread win of 1.6% is too small to be decisive on its own.

Both processors sit at the 93rd percentile among all CPUs in the database, so neither is a slouch. But the EPYC 4464P achieves this percentile with 12 cores versus 16 cores for Intel. That means AMD delivers comparable or better multi-threaded performance with fewer physical cores, which is a meaningful architectural achievement.

For buyers who need ECC memory support, the decision is automatic: the EPYC 4464P is the only option with ECC capability. The Intel part lacks ECC entirely. The AMD part also offers more PCIe lanes (28 versus 20) and integrated graphics, which simplifies system builds. The Intel part counters with DDR4 compatibility, which can reduce platform costs for existing DDR4 memory.

The verdict from the recorded data: the AMD EPYC 4464P is the superior processor in the majority of measured workloads, with a particularly strong showing in integer-heavy, cache-sensitive, and rendering tasks. The Intel Core i7-13790F is preferable for floating-point math workloads specifically.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher single-core performance?

A: It depends on the benchmark. The EPYC 4464P wins all Cinebench single-core tests by 13.6%, scoring 5,677 in R23 single-core versus 4,998 for the Core i7-13790F. However, the Intel part wins the PassMark single-thread test by 1.6% (4,212 versus 4,146).

Q: How do the two processors compare in multi-core rendering?

A: The EPYC 4464P leads in every Cinebench multi-core test. In R23 multi-core, it scores 40,215 versus 35,404 for the Core i7-13790F, a 13.6% advantage. The PassMark multi-thread test also favors AMD, 47,514 versus 44,737, a 6.2% margin.

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-13790F win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins 4 of 17 benchmarks: PassMark floating-point math (110,512 versus 93,090, a 15.8% edge), PassMark physics (3,017 versus 2,873, a 4.8% edge), and PassMark single-thread (4,212 versus 4,146, a 1.6% edge, recorded twice as two separate entries).

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

A: The PassMark find prime numbers test shows the largest gap. The EPYC 4464P scores 343 versus 207 for the Core i7-13790F, a 65.7% advantage for AMD.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD EPYC 4464P supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i7-13790F does not have ECC support. The AMD part also supports DDR5 only, while the Intel part supports both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The EPYC 4464P has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Core i7-13790F has 16 cores and 24 threads. Despite having 4 fewer physical cores, the AMD part wins 13 of 17 benchmarks.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 4464P is the clear choice for rendering and content creation workloads. Its 13.6% across-the-board Cinebench lead, from R15 through R23 and from single-core to multi-core, makes it the better processor for 3D rendering, video encoding, and other applications that rely on those workloads. The 65.7% win in prime number finding also makes it the pick for integer-heavy computational tasks, cryptography, and any workload with branch-heavy code patterns.

The EPYC 4464P is also the only option for ECC memory support, which matters for data integrity in server, workstation, and financial applications. The 28 PCIe Gen 5 lanes versus 20 on the Intel part gives it more headroom for high-bandwidth peripherals. The 64 MB of L3 cache versus 33 MB on Intel helps in cache-sensitive workloads like random string sorting, where the AMD part wins by 19.8%.

The Intel Core i7-13790F has a narrower but real set of wins. The 15.8% advantage in floating-point math makes it the better choice for scientific computing, financial modeling, and any workload dominated by floating-point arithmetic. The 4.8% win in physics simulation reinforces this. The DDR4 memory support on the Intel part could be an advantage for users with existing DDR4 memory, though the database does not quantify the performance impact of DDR4 versus DDR5 in this comparison.

For single-thread responsiveness, the PassMark single-thread result slightly favors Intel at 1.6%. But the Cinebench single-core results favor AMD by 13.6%, so the real-world single-thread story is mixed. The EPYC 4464P also offers integrated Radeon Graphics, which the Intel part lacks, making the AMD chip more flexible for systems without a discrete GPU.

The overall pattern is clear: the EPYC 4464P is the more versatile and powerful processor across most measured workloads, with the Intel part showing strength only in floating-point and physics-specific tasks.