AMD EPYC 7302 vs Intel Core i5-6500 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads, the Intel Core i5-6500 or the AMD EPYC 7302?

A: The AMD EPYC 7302 has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core i5-6500 has 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

A: The AMD EPYC 7302 wins every single-core benchmark in the database. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC scores 3972 against the i5-6500's 672, a delta of -83.1% from the Intel part's perspective.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: The AMD EPYC 7302 supports 204.8 GB/s over an eight-channel memory bus, while the Intel Core i5-6500 supports 34.1 GB/s over a dual-channel bus. Both support DDR4.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i5-6500 includes HD Graphics 530. The AMD EPYC 7302 has no integrated graphics listed in the database.

Q: What is the production status of each processor?

A: The Intel Core i5-6500 is listed as end-of-life, while the AMD EPYC 7302 is listed as active.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7302 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i5-6500 does not.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the AMD EPYC 7302?

A: The launch MSRP is $978.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 7302 wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The Intel Core i5-6500 records zero wins in the database, while the EPYC 7302 records six. For any workload measured in these tests, the EPYC is the faster part. The i5-6500 is a desktop processor from the Skylake generation, while the EPYC 7302 is a server/workstation processor from the Zen 2 (Rome) generation. Buyers should select the EPYC 7302 if they need multi-threaded throughput, high memory bandwidth, ECC support, or PCIe Gen 4 connectivity. The i5-6500 remains relevant only for legacy desktop use cases where its integrated graphics and lower TDP are the deciding factors.

The single-core deltas are consistent at -83.1% or -83.2% across all Cinebench versions, indicating a massive performance gap in every measured scenario. The data suggests the EPYC 7302 is in a different performance class entirely. The i5-6500's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7371, AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX, Intel Core i5-4590, and Intel Core i5-7400, which places it in a desktop-oriented tier. The EPYC 7302's nearest rivals are all server or workstation parts, including the Intel Xeon Gold 5318Y, Intel Core i3-8100, Intel Xeon Platinum 8180M, and Intel Xeon Gold 6326. The percentile rankings are close (63rd for the i5-6500, 64th for the EPYC 7302), but the average benchmark score favors the EPYC at 8139 versus 7569 for the i5-6500.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench R15 multicore test shows the AMD EPYC 7302 scoring 2836 against the Intel Core i5-6500's 479. That is a delta of -83.1% from the Intel part. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the EPYC scores 400 versus 67, a delta of -83.2%. The gap persists in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the EPYC scores 11818 and the i5-6500 scores 1999, again a -83.1% delta. Cinebench R20 single-core shows the EPYC at 1668 and the i5-6500 at 282, a -83.1% delta. Cinebench R23 multicore shows the EPYC at 28140 against 4760 for the i5-6500, and Cinebench R23 single-core shows the EPYC at 3972 against 672. Every single one of these deltas is -83.1% or -83.2%, meaning the Intel part trails by roughly the same fraction in both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering workloads.

The database also contains additional benchmarks for the Intel Core i5-6500 that are not part of the head-to-head set. These include PassMark results for data compression (76510), data encryption (1678), extended instructions (6549), find prime numbers (27), floating point math (12391), integer math (14585), multithread (5604), physics (442), random string sorting (9357), and single-thread (2093). Geekbench scores for the i5-6500 are 3118 multicore and 1099 single-core. The AMD EPYC 7302 does not have corresponding entries for these tests in the database, so direct comparisons are limited to the Cinebench suite. The consistent deltas across all six shared tests strongly indicate that the EPYC 7302 holds an overwhelming advantage.

The nearest rival data for the i5-6500 shows an average score of 7569, with the AMD EPYC 7371 at 7568 (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX at 7578 (-0.1%), the Intel Core i5-4590 at 7609 (-0.5%), and the Intel Core i5-7400 at 7469 (1.3%). For the EPYC 7302, the average score is 8139, with the Intel Xeon Gold 5318Y at 8147 (-0.1%), the Intel Core i3-8100 at 8123 (0.2%), the Intel Xeon Platinum 8180M at 8110 (0.4%), and the Intel Xeon Gold 6326 at 8071 (0.8%). The EPYC 7302 sits in a higher performance tier according to its nearest rivals, all of which are enterprise-class processors.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ substantially. The Intel Core i5-6500 has 4 cores and 4 threads. The AMD EPYC 7302 has 16 cores and 32 threads. Base clocks are 3.20 GHz for the Intel part and 3.00 GHz for the AMD part. Boost clocks are 3.60 GHz for the Intel part and 3.30 GHz for the AMD part. TDP is 65 watts for the Intel part and 155 watts for the AMD part. The sockets differ: Intel Socket 1151 for the i5-6500, AMD Socket SP3 for the EPYC 7302.

Memory support differs in channel count and bandwidth. The Intel part uses dual-channel memory with 34.1 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD part uses eight-channel memory with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. Both support DDR4, but only the AMD part supports ECC memory. PCIe support also differs: the Intel part provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the AMD part provides Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only). The Intel part includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 530), while the AMD part has none. Market segment differs: the i5-6500 is a Desktop part, and the EPYC 7302 is a Server/Workstation part. Production status differs: the i5-6500 is end-of-life, and the EPYC 7302 is active. Release dates differ as well, with the i5-6500 released earlier and the EPYC 7302 released later. The multiplier is locked on both parts.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i5-6500 uses the Skylake architecture, built on a 14 nm process at Intel's foundry, with a die size of 177 mm². The AMD EPYC 7302 uses the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Rome, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 4x 74 mm² and 15,200 million transistors. The cache layouts are markedly different. The Intel part has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part also has 64 KB of L1 per core but has 512 KB of L2 per core and 32 MB of L3 per die, with a total L3 of 128 MB. The EPYC 7302's L3 cache is over twenty times larger than the i5-6500's total L3.

The generation labels in the database highlight the architectural gap: the i5-6500 is listed as Core i5 (Skylake), while the EPYC 7302 is listed as EPYC (Zen 2 (Rome)). The AMD part belongs to the EPYC 7002 series. The Intel part has no series designation. The integrated graphics on the Intel part is a notable architectural feature absent from the AMD part. The process node advantage for the EPYC 7302 (7 nm versus 14 nm) is accompanied by a foundry difference: TSMC for AMD versus Intel for the i5-6500. The die size comparison reflects the different packaging strategies: a single 177 mm² die for Intel versus four 74 mm² dies for AMD.

The memory architecture differences are also architectural in nature. The EPYC 7302's eight-channel memory bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth are designed for high-throughput server workloads. The i5-6500's dual-channel bus and 34.1 GB/s bandwidth are typical for desktop use. The PCIe capabilities reflect the same split: 16 Gen 3 lanes for the desktop part, 128 Gen 4 lanes for the server part. ECC support on the AMD part further reinforces its server positioning.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7302 wins every benchmark where both processors have recorded scores. In Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both multicore and single-core tests favor the EPYC by roughly 83%. The EPYC 7302 is the clear choice for multi-threaded rendering, server workloads, and any application that can exploit its 16 cores and 32 threads. Its 128 MB total L3 cache, eight-channel memory with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, and 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes make it suitable for data-center tasks, virtualization, and memory-bandwidth-intensive applications. The ECC memory support adds reliability for long-running server environments.

The Intel Core i5-6500 has no benchmark wins in the database. Its advantages are qualitative rather than measured. It includes integrated graphics, which the EPYC lacks, so it can power a display without a discrete GPU. Its 65 watt TDP is much lower than the EPYC's 155 watts, making it easier to cool in a desktop chassis. It uses the Intel Socket 1151 platform, which may be relevant for users with existing motherboards. Its boost clock of 3.60 GHz is higher than the EPYC's 3.30 GHz, but this does not translate into a single-core benchmark win in the recorded data. The i5-6500's nearest rivals are desktop processors, while the EPYC 7302's nearest rivals are server and workstation processors, which underscores the intended use cases.

For a user building a desktop system with modest needs, the i5-6500 offers integrated graphics and lower power consumption. For any workload measured in the database, the EPYC 7302 is overwhelmingly faster. The data does not show a single scenario where the Intel part takes the lead. The EPYC 7302's average benchmark score of 8139 exceeds the i5-6500's 7569, and its percentile ranking is slightly higher at 64 versus 63. The verdict is straightforward: the EPYC 7302 dominates the measured performance landscape, while the i5-6500's strengths lie in platform characteristics that the benchmarks do not capture.