AMD EPYC 72F3 vs Intel Core i5-13500E Comparison

The Intel Core i5-13500E and AMD EPYC 72F3 occupy different corners of the processor market, yet their benchmark scores land them in the same performance percentile. The EPYC 72F3, a server-focused Milan part, edges out the desktop-oriented Raptor Lake chip in every single Cinebench test recorded, though the margins are consistently narrow. Both processors sit at the 62nd percentile among all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores differ by only 114 points. The data suggests that while the EPYC 72F3 is the nominal winner in raw compute, the i5-13500E delivers comparable performance from a fundamentally different architectural approach.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-13500E boosts to 4.60 GHz, while the AMD EPYC 72F3 boosts to 4.10 GHz. Despite the lower boost frequency, the EPYC still wins every Cinebench test.

Q: How much larger is the EPYC 72F3's L3 cache?

A: The AMD EPYC 72F3 has 256 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to 24 MB shared on the Intel Core i5-13500E. This represents a tenfold difference in cache capacity.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The Intel Core i5-13500E has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the AMD EPYC 72F3 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel part offers 6 more cores and 4 more threads.

Q: Which processor supports more memory channels?

A: The AMD EPYC 72F3 supports eight-channel memory with a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, whereas the Intel Core i5-13500E is dual-channel with no listed bandwidth figure.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core i5-13500E and the AMD EPYC 72F3 have ECC memory support enabled.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD EPYC 72F3 averages 6700 across benchmarks, while the Intel Core i5-13500E averages 6586. This places the EPYC 1.7% ahead on average.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two processors is stark. The Intel Core i5-13500E is built on Raptor Lake-S, using a 10 nm process fabricated by Intel itself. It packs 14 cores and 20 threads in a hybrid configuration typical of that generation, with a die size of 215 mm². The design focuses on desktop responsiveness and integrated graphics, featuring the UHD Graphics 770. The AMD EPYC 72F3, by contrast, is a Zen 3 Milan part manufactured on TSMC's 7 nm node, a more advanced process that allows for 33,200 million transistors spread across 8 chiplets, each 81 mm². This server-class silicon has no integrated graphics, prioritizing raw compute and platform scalability.

Cache hierarchies could not be more different. The Intel part uses 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a 24 MB shared L3. The EPYC 72F3 uses 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 256 MB shared L3. The EPYC's L3 cache is an order of magnitude larger, a design choice aimed at keeping frequently accessed data closer to the cores. Memory support also diverges: the i5-13500E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, while the EPYC 72F3 is limited to DDR4 but over an eight-channel bus with a rated bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s.

PCIe connectivity highlights their intended roles. The Intel Core i5-13500E provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, suitable for a single high-end GPU or NVMe drive. The AMD EPYC 72F3 offers Gen 4 with 128 lanes, enabling massive I/O expansion for servers. Process node, cache philosophy, memory channels, and PCIe lane counts all reflect a desktop versus data-center split. The Intel part integrates graphics and flexibility for consumer workloads; the AMD part maximizes throughput and capacity for virtualized or database-heavy environments.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 72F3 wins every single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, making it the clear choice for compute-bound tasks where every point matters. Its advantage in Cinebench tests is consistent at roughly 1.7% across both single-core and multi-core workloads. For users running rendering, simulation, or other heavily threaded applications where the EPYC's 8 cores are optimized with 256 MB of L3, the data shows it delivers a slight but uniform edge. The EPYC's eight-channel memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s also gives it a structural advantage in memory-intensive server workloads, even if those specific tests are not in the benchmark set.

The Intel Core i5-13500E, despite losing all head-to-head tests, wins on versatility. It offers 14 cores and 20 threads, six more cores and four more threads than the EPYC, yet consumes far less power with a 65 W TDP versus 180 W. The presence of UHD Graphics 770 means it can operate without a discrete GPU, which is a significant advantage for basic desktop systems or low-power appliances. Its support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory allows builders to choose between cost-effective existing memory or newer faster modules. For workloads that are not purely compute-bound — such as general desktop use, light content creation, or small-scale servers — the i5-13500E's integrated features and lower power draw make it the pragmatic option.

The benchmark data shows a tie in percentile rank at 62, but the EPYC 72F3's average score of 6700 versus the i5-13500E's 6586 reflects its consistent lead. The EPYC is the winner for absolute performance; the Intel part is the winner for adaptability and efficiency. A user needing maximum core count for parallel tasks might favor the i5-13500E's 14 cores, but the actual test results show the EPYC's 8 cores outperform it even in multi-core Cinebench runs, highlighting the impact of architecture and cache over raw core counts.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-13500E | AMD EPYC 72F3 |

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

| Cores | 14 | 8 |

| Threads | 20 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.40 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.60 GHz | 4.10 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 180 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | AMD Socket SP3 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Zen 3 |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-S | Milan |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 7 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not listed | 33,200 million |

| Die Size | 215 mm² | 8x 81 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 24 MB (shared) | 256 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Eight-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not listed | 204.8 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes | Gen 4, 128 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | None |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | 2023-01-03 | 2021-03-14 |

| Part Number | SRMFW | 100-000000327100-100000327WOF |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results tell a consistent story across all six Cinebench tests: the AMD EPYC 72F3 wins every round, but by a narrow and remarkably uniform margin. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 72F3 scores 2334 against the i5-13500E's 2295, a 1.7% difference. The single-core R15 test shows the same pattern, with the EPYC at 329 and the Intel part at 323, a 1.8% lead. This consistency suggests a fundamental per-clock efficiency advantage for the Zen 3 architecture rather than any test-specific quirk.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the EPYC 72F3 again takes multi-core with 9728 points versus 9564 for the i5-13500E, a 1.7% margin. The single-core R20 result sees the EPYC at 1373 and the Intel part at 1349, also a 1.7% difference. These results are notable because the i5-13500E has 14 cores and a higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz, yet the 8-core EPYC with its 4.10 GHz boost still manages to come out ahead. The EPYC's 256 MB L3 cache likely plays a significant role in this outcome, reducing memory latency for frequently accessed data.

The Cinebench R23 tests mirror the earlier results. The EPYC 72F3 scores 23164 in multi-core versus 22772 for the i5-13500E, a 1.7% lead. In single-core, the EPYC posts 3270 against 3214, again a 1.7% margin. The deltaPct across all six tests never exceeds 1.8%, indicating that neither processor has a decisive advantage in any specific workload type. The EPYC 72F3's 6-0 sweep is a clear victory, but the margins are so tight that real-world differences would be minimal for most applications. The data shows the EPYC 72F3 as the more capable compute part, while the i5-13500E offers competitive numbers with a much lower TDP and integrated graphics. The Intel Core i5-13500E's launch MSRP is not listed, while the AMD EPYC 72F3 has a launch MSRP of $2468.