AMD EPYC 7272 vs Intel Core i9-7940X Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7272 and Intel Core i9-7940X are two very different processors that land in the same performance neighborhood, separated by a mere 0.6% in average benchmark score. The EPYC 7272 is a 12-core, 24-thread Zen 2 server chip on the SP3 platform, while the i9-7940X is a 14-core, 28-thread Skylake-X desktop part on Socket 2066. Despite their architectural and platform differences, the data shows an extraordinarily close contest, with the Intel chip edging out the AMD part in every single Cinebench test by the same narrow margin.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are remarkably consistent across the entire Cinebench suite, with the Intel Core i9-7940X winning all six head-to-head comparisons by a uniform 0.3% margin. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i9-7940X scores 2161 against the EPYC 7272's 2155, a difference of just 6 points. The single-core R15 test shows the same pattern: 305 for Intel versus 304 for AMD. This is not a meaningful performance gap; it is well within run-to-run variance for most workloads.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the Intel part scores 9006 in multicore while the EPYC 7272 posts 8982. The single-core R20 results are 1271 versus 1267, again favoring the i9-7940X by the same 0.3% delta. The trend continues in Cinebench R23, where the i9-7940X scores 21444 multicore and 3027 single-core, against the EPYC's 21386 and 3019. In every case, the deltaPct is exactly -0.3% from the AMD part's perspective, meaning the Intel chip is the winner, but by a margin so slim that it is effectively a statistical tie.

What is notable here is that the i9-7940X achieves this victory despite having 14 cores versus 12, a higher base clock of 3.10 GHz versus 2.90 GHz, and a significantly higher boost clock of 4.40 GHz versus 3.20 GHz. The EPYC 7272's Zen 2 architecture, built on a 7 nm process from TSMC, is clearly closing the IPC gap with Intel's Skylake design on 14 nm. The fact that a 12-core server chip can match a 14-core desktop HEDT part within 0.3% across the board speaks to the efficiency of the Zen 2 core design.

The overall average benchmark scores confirm the near-deadlock. The EPYC 7272 has an average benchmark score of 6186, while the i9-7940X sits at 6147. Interestingly, the EPYC's nearest rivals list shows it is actually 0.6% ahead of the i9-7940X in average score, while the i9-7940X's own nearest rivals show it 0.6% behind the EPYC. This apparent contradiction is because the average scores include Geekbench results that are only available for the Intel part; the i9-7940X's Geekbench multicore score of 10516 and single-core score of 1445 are not in the EPYC's benchmark set, which slightly skews the aggregate comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i9-7940X has 14 cores and 28 threads, while the AMD EPYC 7272 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel part also boosts higher, reaching 4.40 GHz versus the EPYC's 3.20 GHz, though its base clock advantage is smaller at 3.10 GHz versus 2.90 GHz.

Q: Are these processors in the same performance tier?

A: Yes, the data shows they are nearly identical in performance. The i9-7940X wins every Cinebench test by exactly 0.3%, and the average benchmark scores are 6186 for the EPYC 7272 and 6147 for the i9-7940X, a gap of only 39 points. Both sit at the 61st percentile among all CPUs.

Q: What are the key platform differences?

A: The EPYC 7272 uses AMD Socket SP3 with an eight-channel DDR4 memory bus and 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only), plus ECC memory support. The i9-7940X uses Intel Socket 2066 with a quad-channel DDR4 bus and 44 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only), and it lacks ECC support.

Q: Does the EPYC 7272 support more memory bandwidth?

A: No, despite having eight memory channels versus the i9-7940X's four, both are listed with the same memory bandwidth of 85.3 GB/s. This is a notable data point, suggesting the EPYC's extra channels do not translate to higher bandwidth in this comparison.

Q: Which processor is from a newer architecture?

A: The AMD EPYC 7272 is based on Zen 2 architecture (codename Rome) and uses a 7 nm process from TSMC, with 7,600 million transistors across a 2x 74 mm² die size. The Intel Core i9-7940X uses Skylake architecture (codename Skylake-X) on a 14 nm Intel process with a 484 mm² die size.

Q: What is the production status of each chip?

A: The AMD EPYC 7272 is listed as "Active" and is part of the EPYC 7002 series, while the Intel Core i9-7940X is marked "End-of-life" in its production status. The EPYC also has a newer release date of 2019-08-06, compared to the i9-7940X's 2017-08-31.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two processors is substantial. The AMD EPYC 7272 is built on the Zen 2 microarchitecture, codenamed Rome, and manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 7,600 million transistors into a dual-die design with each die measuring 74 mm², for a total of 2x 74 mm². The Intel Core i9-7940X, by contrast, uses the older Skylake architecture, codenamed Skylake-X, on Intel's 14 nm process with a monolithic 484 mm² die. The process node difference is significant: 7 nm versus 14 nm, which explains how AMD can achieve comparable performance with fewer cores and a much smaller die area.

Cache configurations also diverge sharply. The EPYC 7272 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 32 MB of L3 per die and 64 MB of total L3 cache. The i9-7940X has the same 64 KB L1 per core but a much larger 1 MB L2 per core, and a shared 19.25 MB L3 cache. The EPYC's L3 is more than three times larger in total, which can benefit server workloads with large working sets, though the i9's larger L2 per core may help with certain latency-sensitive tasks.

Memory architecture is another major differentiator. The EPYC 7272 supports DDR4 over an eight-channel memory bus, while the i9-7940X uses a quad-channel configuration. Surprisingly, both are listed at 85.3 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The EPYC also supports ECC memory, which the Intel part does not. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the EPYC offers 128 lanes of PCIe Gen 4 (CPU only), while the i9-7940X provides 44 lanes of PCIe Gen 3 (CPU only). That is a massive difference in both lane count and generation, making the EPYC far more expandable for storage and accelerator-heavy workloads.

The EPYC 7272 is a server/workstation part with a locked multiplier, while the i9-7940X is a desktop part with an unlocked multiplier, appealing to overclockers. The Intel chip also has a higher TDP of 165 watts versus the EPYC's 120 watts, which is notable given the i9's higher clock speeds. Neither chip has integrated graphics. The EPYC's generation is listed as "EPYC (Zen 2 (Rome))" while the i9 is "Core i9 (X-Series 7th Gen)".

The Verdict

The benchmark data paints a picture of two processors that are functionally interchangeable in raw Cinebench performance, despite their very different designs. The Intel Core i9-7940X wins all six head-to-head tests by 0.3%, but that margin is negligible in real-world terms. The EPYC 7272 matches this performance with 12 cores versus 14, a lower clock speed, and 40 fewer watts of TDP, which suggests superior architectural efficiency from the Zen 2 design.

The choice between these two should come down to platform requirements rather than raw speed. The AMD EPYC 7272 is the clear pick for server or workstation deployments that need ECC memory support, eight-channel memory bandwidth, and 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes. It also remains in active production, while the i9-7940X is end-of-life. The Intel part is the choice for a desktop build where the unlocked multiplier enables overclocking, and where the higher base and boost clocks (3.10 GHz and 4.40 GHz versus 2.90 GHz and 3.20 GHz) might provide a slight edge in lightly threaded tasks, though the single-core benchmarks show this advantage is minimal at 0.3%.

For users who need a platform that scales with enterprise features like ECC and massive PCIe connectivity, the EPYC 7272 is the data-backed recommendation. For those building a conventional desktop workstation who value overclocking headroom, the i9-7940X offers the same level of performance in a more familiar form factor. With only a 0.6% difference in average benchmark score, neither chip has a meaningful performance advantage; the decision rests entirely on platform features and ecosystem fit.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 7272 | Intel Core i9-7940X |

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

| Cores | 12 | 14 |

| Threads | 24 | 28 |

| Base Clock | 2.90 GHz | 3.10 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.20 GHz | 4.40 GHz |

| TDP | 120 W | 165 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | Intel Socket 2066 |

| Architecture | Zen 2 | Skylake |

| Codename | Rome | Skylake-X |

| Process Node | 7 nm (TSMC) | 14 nm (Intel) |

| Transistors | 7,600 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 2x 74 mm² | 484 mm² |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 32 MB (per die), 64 MB total | 19.25 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Eight-channel | Quad-channel |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 128 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3, 44 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Launch MSRP | $625 | $1399 |