AMD EPYC 7302 vs Intel Core i7-1065G7 Comparison

The Intel Core i7-1065G7 and AMD EPYC 7302 occupy opposite ends of the computing spectrum, yet both hold the 64th percentile among all CPUs. The EPYC 7302 is a 16-core, 32-thread server processor built on TSMC's 7 nm process, while the i7-1065G7 is a 4-core, 8-thread mobile chip on Intel's 10 nm node. Their benchmark scores reflect this divide, with the EPYC winning every head-to-head test, but the data also reveals where the mobile chip's strengths lie in low-power scenarios.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD EPYC 7302 dominates every Cinebench comparison, and the margin is staggering. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the EPYC scores 2836 against the i7's 691, a delta of -75.6% from the Intel part's perspective. The single-core R15 test shows the same pattern: EPYC at 400 versus Intel at 97, again a -75.7% difference. These aren't close contests; the EPYC's 16 cores and 32 threads simply overwhelm the i7's 4 cores and 8 threads in any workload that scales.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the EPYC 7302 posts 11818 in multicore while the i7-1065G7 manages 2883 — a -75.6% delta. The single-core R20 result is 1668 for AMD versus 406 for Intel, a -75.7% gap. This consistency across R15 and R20 suggests the performance relationship is stable regardless of the rendering engine's version. The i7's Sunny Cove architecture improves single-thread efficiency over older Intel designs, but it cannot close a gap this wide.

Cinebench R23 tells the same story. The EPYC 7302 scores 28140 in multicore, crushing the i7's 6866 (-75.6% delta). In R23 single-core, the EPYC hits 3972 versus the i7's 969, another -75.6% difference. The EPYC's 3.30 GHz boost clock is lower than the i7's 3.90 GHz boost, yet the AMD chip still wins single-threaded tests by roughly 4x. This indicates the Zen 2 core at 7 nm has a significant IPC advantage over Intel's Ice Lake at 10 nm, despite the clock speed deficit.

The head-to-head tally is lopsided: AMD wins 6, Intel wins 0. There is no benchmark in this dataset where the i7-1065G7 outperforms the EPYC 7302. Even in theoretical single-thread scenarios, the EPYC's architecture proves superior. The i7's only consolation is its 15 W TDP, which we'll explore later, but in raw compute the EPYC is categorically faster.

Architecture Differences

The foundational difference is core count and process node. The i7-1065G7 packs 4 cores and 8 threads on Intel's 10 nm Ice Lake-U silicon, while the EPYC 7302 uses 16 cores and 32 threads on TSMC's 7 nm process. The EPYC is built on the Zen 2 (Rome) architecture, whereas the i7 uses the Sunny Cove core design. These are different generations with different design priorities: Sunny Cove targets mobile efficiency, Zen 2 targets server throughput.

Cache configurations diverge sharply. The i7 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The EPYC provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of L3 per die, totaling 128 MB across the chip. That's 16x more total L3 cache on the AMD part, which helps in data-heavy server workloads. The i7's smaller cache is appropriate for its mobile footprint.

Memory infrastructure is another chasm. The i7 supports dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC. The EPYC supports eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory. That's 4x the memory bandwidth on the EPYC, which is critical for database and virtualization workloads. The i7's memory controller is designed for laptops, while the EPYC's is built for servers.

PCIe and graphics also differ. The i7 has Gen 3 PCIe and integrated Iris Plus graphics, making it a complete mobile SoC. The EPYC has Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only) and no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU. The EPYC's PCIe Gen 4 doubles the bandwidth of the i7's Gen 3, enabling faster NVMe storage and GPU interconnects in server environments.

Physical characteristics reflect their intended markets. The i7 uses Intel BGA 1526 socket, has a die size of 123 mm², and comes from Intel's foundry. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3, has a die size of 4x 74 mm², and is manufactured by TSMC. The EPYC's transistor count is listed at 15,200 million, while the i7's is not provided. The EPYC's multi-die design with 32 MB L3 per die is a hallmark of Zen 2's chiplet architecture.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows the EPYC 7302 wins in every measurable compute benchmark, but the i7-1065G7 wins in the mobile context. The i7's 15 W TDP makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops, whereas the EPYC's 155 W TDP requires a server chassis with robust cooling. The i7 includes integrated Iris Plus graphics, so it can run a display without a discrete GPU — the EPYC cannot.

For single-threaded tasks, the EPYC's 3.30 GHz boost is lower than the i7's 3.90 GHz boost, yet the EPYC still wins by ~4x in Cinebench R23 single-core. This suggests the EPYC is better even for lightly-threaded applications, assuming the workload isn't constrained by power or thermal limits. However, in a laptop, the i7's efficiency allows sustained operation on battery, a scenario the EPYC can't enter.

The EPYC's strengths are in multi-threaded server workloads: virtualization, database transactions, and heavy compilation. Its 32 threads and 128 MB L3 cache excel where data fits in cache. The i7's strengths are in mobility and basic productivity, where its 4 cores and 8 threads handle everyday tasks with low power draw. For a user needing a portable machine, the i7 is the only option; for a datacenter, the EPYC is the clear choice.

The benchmark data doesn't include power efficiency metrics, but the TDP figures are telling. The EPYC's 155 W TDP is over 10x the i7's 15 W. This means the i7 can be cooled by a small fan or passively in some designs, while the EPYC requires active server cooling. The i7's integrated graphics also eliminate the need for a separate GPU, reducing total system power.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7302 is overwhelmingly faster. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 28140 versus the Intel Core i7-1065G7's 6866, a -75.6% delta from Intel's perspective.

Q: Does the Intel i7-1065G7 win any benchmark against the EPYC 7302?

A: No. In the head-to-head dataset, the EPYC 7302 wins all 6 tests, including single-threaded and multi-threaded Cinebench R15, R20, and R23.

Q: How does the single-thread performance compare?

A: The EPYC 7302 scores 3972 in Cinebench R23 single-core, while the i7-1065G7 scores 969. Even though the i7 boosts to 3.90 GHz versus the EPYC's 3.30 GHz, the EPYC is faster due to architectural advantages.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences?

A: The EPYC 7302 supports eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the i7-1065G7 supports dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s. The EPYC also supports ECC memory; the i7 does not.

Q: Is the i7-1065G7 better for mobile use?

A: Yes, because it has a 15 W TDP versus the EPYC's 155 W TDP, and it includes integrated Iris Plus graphics. The EPYC requires a discrete GPU and a server platform.

Q: What about cache sizes?

A: The i7 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the EPYC has 32 MB per die, totaling 128 MB. The EPYC also has larger L2 cache per core at 512 KB versus 256 KB on the i7.

The Verdict

For anyone building a server or workstation, the AMD EPYC 7302 is the only choice from this dataset. It wins every benchmark by a factor of ~4x, offers 16 cores and 32 threads, and provides 128 MB of L3 cache. Its eight-channel memory with ECC support and PCIe Gen 4 with 128 lanes make it a proper server platform. The launch MSRP is $978, and its nearest rival is the Intel Xeon Gold 5318Y with an average score of 8147, which is only 0.1% lower than the EPYC's 8139 average.

For a laptop user, the Intel Core i7-1065G7 is the practical pick, but not because it performs better — it doesn't. The i7's 15 W TDP and integrated Iris Plus graphics make it viable in portable devices, while the EPYC's 155 W TDP and lack of graphics preclude mobile use. The i7's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-10210U, which scores 8344 on average, just 0.6% higher than the i7's 8293. This places the i7 in a competitive mobile segment.

The data does not support any scenario where the i7 outperforms the EPYC in raw compute. If your workload is compute-bound and you have server infrastructure, the EPYC is categorically superior. If your requirement is a low-power mobile system, the i7 is the only viable option, despite its lower scores. The EPYC's 32 threads will crush any multi-threaded job, but it will also require a server-grade motherboard and power delivery — none of which fit in a laptop chassis.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-1065G7 | AMD EPYC 7302 |

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

| Cores | 4 | 16 |

| Threads | 8 | 32 |

| Base Clock | 1300.00 MHz | 3.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.90 GHz | 3.30 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 155 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1526 | AMD Socket SP3 |

| Architecture | Ice Lake | Zen 2 |

| Codename | Ice Lake-U | Rome |

| Generation | Core i7 (Sunny Cove-U) | EPYC (Zen 2 (Rome)) |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 7 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not provided | 15,200 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 4x 74 mm² |

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

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 32 MB (per die), 128 MB total |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 204.8 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Iris Plus | None |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | 2019-07-31 | 2019-08-06 |

| Launch MSRP | Not provided | $978 |

| Part Number | SRG0N | 100-000000043 |