AMD EPYC 7261 vs Intel Core i7-11390H Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7261 and Intel Core i7-11390H are engineered for entirely different corners of the computing market, and the benchmark data reflects that divide clearly. The EPYC 7261, a server-focused Naples part, holds a decisive lead in every single Cinebench test included in this comparison, while the Core i7-11390H, a mobile Tiger Lake-H chip, counters with a much lower power envelope and integrated graphics. For a builder, the choice is not about which is "faster" in a vacuum, but which platform's trade-offs—raw throughput versus mobility and efficiency—align with the workload.

The Verdict

Choose the AMD EPYC 7261 if your priority is raw multi-threaded compute in a server or workstation context. The data is unambiguous: it wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with a consistent advantage of approximately 15% across both single-core and multi-core Cinebench tests. Its 8 cores and 16 threads, coupled with 32 MB of shared L3 cache and eight-channel DDR4 memory support, make it the superior choice for heavily threaded workloads like virtualization, database processing, or rendering that can scale across cores. Its 50th percentile ranking among all CPUs, while matching the Core i7, is supported by an average benchmark score of 2740, slightly ahead of the i7's 2715.

Choose the Intel Core i7-11390H if you need a compact, mobile solution where power consumption and integrated graphics are critical. While it loses every benchmark race, its 28W TDP is a fraction of the EPYC's 170W, making it the only realistic option for a thin-and-light laptop. The inclusion of Iris XE 96EU integrated graphics means it can handle display output without a discrete GPU, something the EPYC entirely lacks. Its 5.00 GHz boost clock, while not translating into a benchmark win, suggests strong short-burst performance for responsive everyday tasks, but the data shows that even in single-core tests, the EPYC 7261 holds a 15.5% lead in Cinebench R15 and a 15.2% lead in R20.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is vast. The EPYC 7261 is built on AMD's Zen architecture, codenamed Naples, using a 14nm process from GlobalFoundries. It features 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 2.90 GHz. Its cache layout is substantial: 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a large 32 MB shared L3 cache. This is a server-class part designed for the AMD Socket SP3 platform, supporting eight-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 170.6 GB/s, and it supports ECC memory. It also has an unlocked multiplier, allowing for overclocking.

The Core i7-11390H is built on Intel's Tiger Lake architecture, specifically Tiger Lake-H, using a 10nm process from Intel. It is a much smaller chip, with 4 cores and 8 threads. Its base clock is higher at 2.90 GHz, and its boost clock is dramatically higher at 5.00 GHz. The cache structure is different: 80 KB of L1 per core, a much larger 1.25 MB of L2 per core, but only 12 MB of shared L3 cache. It uses the Intel BGA 1449 socket and supports dual-channel DDR4 memory, with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. It does not support ECC memory, and its multiplier is locked. Critically, it features integrated Iris XE 96EU graphics, while the EPYC has none.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are remarkably consistent, showing a uniform performance advantage for the EPYC 7261 across all tested scenarios. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC scores 954 against the i7's 828, a 15.2% lead. The single-core test in R15 shows a similar story: 134 for the EPYC versus 116 for the i7, a 15.5% advantage.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern holds. The EPYC 7261 scores 3979 in multi-core, beating the i7's 3451 by 15.3%. In single-core, the EPYC scores 561, beating the i7's 487 by 15.2%. The most recent Cinebench R23 test reinforces this dominance. The EPYC scores 9476 in multi-core, a 15.3% advantage over the i7's 8218. In single-core, the EPYC scores 1337, again a 15.3% lead over the i7's 1160.

It is important to note that the Core i7 has additional Geekbench scores in its record—5478 multi-core and 1985 single-core—but these are not part of the head-to-head comparison, which focuses solely on Cinebench. The data shows that despite the i7's much higher boost clock, the EPYC's older but more robust architecture with double the cores and threads simply delivers more work in these rendering benchmarks. The EPYC's win count stands at 6, with the i7 at 0.

Specification Differences

The specification sheet reveals the fundamental design philosophy differences. The most striking contrast is in core count and power: the EPYC 7261 has 8 cores and 16 threads, but draws 170W, while the Core i7-11390H has 4 cores and 8 threads, drawing only 28W. The EPYC is a 14nm part from GlobalFoundries with a die size of 213 mm² and 4,800 million transistors, whereas the i7 is a 10nm part from Intel with a smaller die size of 146.1 mm².

Memory support differs significantly. The EPYC uses eight-channel DDR4 memory, providing a massive 170.6 GB/s of bandwidth, while the i7 uses dual-channel DDR4, limited to 51.2 GB/s. The EPYC supports ECC memory, which is crucial for server stability, while the i7 does not. PCIe support also differs: the EPYC is Gen 3, while the i7 supports Gen 4 with 20 lanes on the CPU. The EPYC has no integrated graphics, while the i7 includes Iris XE 96EU. The sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket SP3 for the EPYC versus Intel BGA 1449 for the i7. The EPYC has an unlocked multiplier, the i7 does not. Finally, the release dates are years apart, with the EPYC launching in June 2018 and the i7 in June 2021.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 7261 is faster in every multi-core benchmark tested. It leads the Intel Core i7-11390H by 15.2% in Cinebench R15 (954 vs 828), 15.3% in Cinebench R20 (3979 vs 3451), and 15.3% in Cinebench R23 (9476 vs 8218).

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-11390H win any benchmark comparisons?

A: No. In the head-to-head data provided, the EPYC 7261 wins all 6 comparisons. The Core i7 has no wins in the tested Cinebench suite.

Q: Which CPU has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The Intel Core i7-11390H has a significantly higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz, compared to the AMD EPYC 7261's 2.90 GHz. Despite this, the EPYC still achieves higher single-core benchmark scores.

Q: Can I use ECC memory with these processors?

A: Only the AMD EPYC 7261 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i7-11390H does not.

Q: Which CPU is designed for a laptop?

A: The Intel Core i7-11390H is designed for mobile use, with a market segment of "Mobile" and a 28W TDP. The AMD EPYC 7261 is a server/workstation part with a 170W TDP.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7261 wins in all measured performance metrics. Its 8 cores and 16 threads, combined with a larger 32 MB L3 cache and eight-channel memory bandwidth, provide a clear advantage in multi-threaded server workloads. It also wins in single-core Cinebench tests, showing that its older Zen architecture still outpaces the newer Tiger Lake part in this specific rendering workload. The data supports its use in a server or workstation where maximum compute throughput is required, and where the 170W TDP is not a constraint.

The Intel Core i7-11390H wins in the practical realm of system design, not benchmark scores. Its 28W TDP makes it feasible for a laptop chassis, and its integrated Iris XE 96EU graphics eliminate the need for a separate GPU for basic display tasks. Its higher base and boost clocks may offer snappier response in short, lightly-threaded bursts, but the benchmark data does not support a performance win over the EPYC. Its dual-channel memory and smaller cache are acceptable for a mobile platform, but they contribute to its lower memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s compared to the EPYC's 170.6 GB/s. In short, the EPYC 7261 is the performance winner, while the Core i7-11390H is the mobility and efficiency winner.