AMD EPYC 7251 vs Intel Core i5-11260H Comparison

# Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data presents an unusual picture: the Intel Core i5-11260H wins every single head-to-head comparison against the AMD EPYC 7251, yet the margins are remarkably narrow. Across all six Cinebench tests, the Intel part leads by between 1.6% and 1.7%. This is not a case of one processor dominating another in a meaningful way; rather, it is a consistent but incremental advantage that appears across both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads.

The Intel Core i5-11260H claims victory in every Cinebench iteration. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 1300 against the EPYC's 1279, a 1.6% edge. The single-core R15 test shows 183 versus 180, a 1.7% margin. Moving to R20, the Intel chip posts 5420 multicore and 764 single-core, while the AMD server part manages 5331 and 752 respectively, again with 1.7% and 1.6% deltas. In R23, the pattern holds: 12905 versus 12694 multicore (1.7%) and 1821 versus 1792 single-core (1.6%).

The Intel processor also appears in Geekbench results, where it scores 5780 multicore and 1595 single-core. The AMD EPYC 7251 has no Geekbench entries in the data, so those tests cannot be compared directly. Still, the available evidence shows the Intel part winning all six contested benchmarks, with the multicore and single-core margins nearly identical across every test generation.

Looking at average benchmark scores, the Intel Core i5-11260H averages 3721 across its benchmark suite, while the AMD EPYC 7251 averages 3671. That difference of 50 points represents roughly 1.4%, which aligns with the per-test deltas. Both processors sit at the 56th percentile among all CPUs, indicating they occupy a similar overall performance tier despite their very different designs and intended markets.

The EPYC 7251's wins, if any, do not appear in this dataset. It has zero victories in the head-to-head table. The closest it comes is in Cinebench R15 multicore, where the 21-point gap is the smallest absolute difference. But even there, the Intel part takes the win. The data suggests that if the EPYC has strengths, they are not visible in these particular Cinebench workloads.

# The Verdict

The data points to a clear but narrow conclusion: the Intel Core i5-11260H is the faster processor in every benchmark measured. Anyone selecting between these two strictly on the basis of Cinebench performance should choose the Intel part. It leads in all six tests, with margins that, while small, are consistent across single-core and multi-core workloads.

That said, the choice is not simply about speed. The Intel Core i5-11260H is a mobile processor with a 35 W TDP, while the AMD EPYC 7251 is a server/workstation chip with a 120 W TDP. The Intel part achieves its wins while consuming far less power, according to the TDP figures. The EPYC, despite its higher core count of 8 versus 6, cannot translate that extra hardware into a performance lead in these tests.

The EPYC 7251 does offer features the Intel chip lacks: ECC memory support, eight-channel memory, and a much higher memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s compared to 51.2 GB/s. It also has a larger L3 cache at 32 MB shared versus 12 MB shared. These specifications matter in server environments where data integrity and memory throughput are critical, but they do not show up as advantages in Cinebench scores.

For a user prioritizing raw Cinebench numbers, the Intel Core i5-11260H is the answer. For a user needing ECC memory, eight-channel memory, or a server-class platform, the EPYC 7251 remains relevant despite losing every benchmark in this comparison. The verdict depends on whether the workload resembles Cinebench or something more memory-bound and reliability-focused.

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest percentage win for the Intel Core i5-11260H comes in three tests: Cinebench R15 single-core, R20 multicore, and R23 multicore, each with a 1.7% delta over the AMD EPYC 7251. In R15 single-core, the scores are 183 and 180, a three-point difference. In R20 multicore, the Intel part scores 5420 against 5331, an 89-point gap. In R23 multicore, the difference is 211 points, with 12905 versus 12694.

The 1.6% deltas appear in R15 multicore, R20 single-core, and R23 single-core. R15 multicore shows 1300 versus 1279, a 21-point margin. R20 single-core has 764 versus 752, a 12-point gap. R23 single-core shows 1821 versus 1792, a 29-point difference.

What stands out is how consistent the Intel advantage is across all six tests. The deltas never exceed 1.7% and never drop below 1.6%. This uniformity suggests the performance gap is systemic rather than workload-specific. The Intel chip's higher boost clock of 4.40 GHz, compared to the EPYC's 2.90 GHz, likely contributes to the single-core wins. The multi-core wins, despite the EPYC having 8 cores and 16 threads against the Intel's 6 cores and 12 threads, are more surprising.

The EPYC 7251's best showing is in R15 multicore, where the 1.6% deficit is the smallest relative gap in the dataset. Its worst showing is also relative: the 1.7% deficits in three tests. In absolute terms, the largest point gap is the 211-point difference in R23 multicore, which is the most demanding of the Cinebench workloads. The Intel part scales better as the workload becomes heavier, even though it has fewer cores.

There are no Geekbench results for the EPYC 7251, so the Intel Core i5-11260H's scores of 5780 multicore and 1595 single-core cannot be compared. Those numbers stand alone in this comparison, representing the Intel part's performance in a different benchmark suite.

# FAQ

Q: Which processor wins all head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i5-11260H wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests against the AMD EPYC 7251. It has 6 wins and 0 losses in the head-to-head table.

Q: How large is the performance difference in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel part leads by 1.7% in Cinebench R20 multicore and R23 multicore, and by 1.6% in R15 multicore. The scores are 5420 versus 5331, 12905 versus 12694, and 1300 versus 1279 respectively.

Q: Does the EPYC 7251 win any benchmark?

A: No. The EPYC 7251 has zero wins in the head-to-head benchmark data. It loses all six tests to the Intel Core i5-11260H.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i5-11260H has an average benchmark score of 3721, while the AMD EPYC 7251 averages 3671. The Intel part is about 1.4% higher on average.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-11260H wins single-core tests by 1.7% in Cinebench R15 (183 versus 180) and by 1.6% in R20 (764 versus 752) and R23 (1821 versus 1792).

Q: Which processor has the higher percentile ranking among all CPUs?

A: Both processors are at the 56th percentile among all CPUs, meaning they rank identically in the overall distribution of processor performance.

# Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i5-11260H is built on Intel's Tiger Lake-H architecture, using a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel itself. The die size is 190 mm². The AMD EPYC 7251 uses the Zen architecture with the codename Naples, built on a 14 nm process node by GlobalFoundries. Its die size is 213 mm², and it contains 4,800 million transistors, a figure not provided for the Intel part.

The cache layouts differ substantially. The Intel chip has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, with 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC has 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC's larger L3 cache is a notable advantage in server workloads, though it does not translate to Cinebench wins.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The Intel Core i5-11260H supports dual-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s and no ECC support. The EPYC 7251 supports eight-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s and ECC support. That is three times the memory bandwidth, a significant difference for memory-intensive server applications.

The Intel processor integrates UHD Graphics, while the EPYC 7251 has no integrated graphics. The Intel part uses PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the EPYC uses PCIe Gen 3. The Intel chip is a mobile part with a 35 W TDP, while the EPYC is a server/workstation part with a 120 W TDP. The EPYC has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel chip does not.

The release dates are far apart: the Intel Core i5-11260H was released on 2021-05-10, while the AMD EPYC 7251 was released on 2017-06-28. Both are listed as Active in production status. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $250; the EPYC's launch MSRP is not provided.

# Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ: the Intel Core i5-11260H has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the AMD EPYC 7251 has 8 cores and 16 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the Intel part wins all benchmarks, indicating higher per-core efficiency.

Base clocks are identical at 2.10 GHz for both processors. Boost clocks differ significantly: the Intel chip boosts to 4.40 GHz, while the EPYC reaches only 2.90 GHz. This 1.50 GHz difference in boost clock is the most dramatic specification gap between the two.

The TDP figures are 35 W for the Intel part and 120 W for the EPYC. The Intel chip is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 1787 socket, while the EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3. The Intel part has integrated UHD Graphics; the EPYC has none.

Cache specifications show the EPYC with larger L1 (96 KB per core versus 80 KB per core) and L3 (32 MB shared versus 12 MB shared), but the Intel part has larger L2 (1.25 MB per core versus 512 KB per core). Memory support is DDR4 for both, but the EPYC's eight-channel bus and 153.6 GB/s bandwidth dwarf the Intel's dual-channel 51.2 GB/s.

ECC memory is supported only on the EPYC. PCIe generations differ: Gen 4 on Intel versus Gen 3 on AMD. The Intel part has 20 PCIe lanes from the CPU; the EPYC's lane count is not specified. The EPYC has an unlocked multiplier; the Intel does not. The Intel part number is SRKT0; the EPYC part number is listed as PS7251BFV8SAFPS7251BFAFWOF. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $250; the EPYC has no listed launch MSRP.