AMD EPYC 7313P vs Intel Core i7-13850HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison between the AMD EPYC 7313P and the Intel Core i7-13850HX is decisively one-sided, with the EPYC taking 14 of 17 benchmark wins. The scale of those wins varies dramatically by workload, and the data reveals a clear pattern: the EPYC dominates in most compute categories, while the Intel part claims a narrow but important set of victories in single-threaded and floating-point tasks.

Starting with the Cinebench suite, the EPYC 7313P wins every single test by a consistent margin. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the EPYC scores 34952 against the Intel's 30695, a 13.9% advantage. The same 13.9% delta appears in Cinebench R15 multicore (3522 vs 3093), R20 multicore (14679 vs 12891), R20 singlecore (2072 vs 1819), and R23 singlecore (4934 vs 4333). Even Cinebench R15 singlecore shows a 14% edge for the EPYC, at 497 versus 436. What is notable here is the uniformity: whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded, the EPYC holds roughly the same percentage lead in these rendering tests. That consistency suggests the EPYC's architectural efficiency per clock is carrying the day, rather than raw core count alone.

The Passmark suite tells a more layered story. In data compression, the EPYC scores 528167 against 441525, a 19.6% win. Data encryption is even more lopsided: 35727 versus 26062, a 37.1% gap. Extended instructions favor the EPYC by 23.3% (32784 vs 26586). Integer math goes to the EPYC at 145558 versus 126852, a 14.7% edge. Random string sorting is another EPYC win, 62596 versus 49198, a 27.2% margin. The multithread Passmark score shows the EPYC ahead 41121 to 36870, an 11.5% difference.

The two most striking EPYC wins are in find prime numbers and physics. In find prime numbers, the EPYC scores 346 versus just 184, an 88% advantage. That is the single largest percentage delta in the entire comparison. In physics, the EPYC posts 4229 against 2483, a 70.3% lead. These are workloads that scale heavily with memory bandwidth and cache capacity, both areas where the EPYC's server-class design should excel, and the numbers confirm it.

The Intel Core i7-13850HX wins three tests, all in Passmark. Floating point math goes to Intel at 92369 versus 82260, a 10.9% edge. The two single-thread tests, passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread, both show Intel at 3769 versus the EPYC's 2634, a 30.1% advantage. That single-thread gap is the largest margin Intel achieves anywhere in the comparison, and it aligns with the Intel part's much higher boost clock. The floating point win, while smaller, is still a meaningful counterpoint to the EPYC's dominance in integer-oriented workloads.

Interpreting these results, the EPYC 7313P is the stronger processor in the overwhelming majority of measured tasks, often by double-digit margins. The Intel i7-13850HX is not without merit, however: its 30.1% single-thread lead and its floating point advantage show that in certain latency-sensitive or vector-heavy tasks, the mobile part can outpace the server chip. The overall average benchmark score confirms the EPYC's edge: 53206 versus 50761, a difference of roughly 4.8%. The EPYC sits at the 91st percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Intel part sits at the 90th, a narrow overall percentile gap that masks how one-sided the head-to-head results actually are.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion for most workloads: the AMD EPYC 7313P is the better performer across the broadest set of tests. It wins 14 of 17 benchmarks, and its victories in encryption, prime number finding, physics, and data compression are not marginal, they are substantial. The EPYC also holds a higher average benchmark score at 53206 versus 50761, and it ranks one percentile point higher in the database at 91 versus 90. For anyone running multi-threaded server or workstation workloads, rendering, encryption, compression, or integer-heavy calculations, the EPYC 7313P is the processor the data supports.

The Intel Core i7-13850HX is the pick only for specific scenarios. Its 30.1% single-thread advantage and its 10.9% floating point math win are real, and they matter for applications where per-core responsiveness or floating point throughput is the bottleneck. The Intel part also comes with integrated graphics, the UHD Graphics 770, which the EPYC lacks entirely. For a mobile system where a discrete GPU is not always present, that integrated graphics support is a functional advantage that no benchmark in this comparison directly measures. The Intel part is also unlocked, allowing overclocking, while the EPYC is not.

Strictly from the recorded data, the EPYC 7313P is the higher-performing processor for the majority of tasks. The Intel i7-13850HX should be chosen when single-threaded performance, floating point math, integrated graphics, or overclocking are the priority. The EPYC's 16 cores and 32 threads against the Intel's 20 cores and 28 threads is an interesting inversion: the Intel part has more cores, but the EPYC still wins most multi-threaded tests, which points to the EPYC's memory bandwidth and cache architecture playing a decisive role.

The percentile rankings reinforce this: the EPYC's nearest rival by average score is the AMD Ryzen 7313P's own comparison pool, where it is 0.2% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X and 0.4% ahead of the Intel Xeon 634. The Intel i7-13850HX's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 9 5900XT, which it trails by 0.1%, and the Intel Core i9-14900T, which trails it by 0.5%. Both chips are effectively in the same performance tier overall, but the distribution of wins is far from even.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The EPYC 7313P is built on AMD's Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Milan, on a 7 nm process node from TSMC, with the foundry being TSMC. The Intel Core i7-13850HX uses Raptor Lake, specifically Raptor Lake-HX, on a 10 nm process node from Intel. The EPYC uses 4x 81 mm² die sizes, and it uses 16,600 million transistors on the EPYC side. The Intel part has a die size of 257 mm².

The EPYC is a 16-core, 32-thread processor with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. The Intel part has 20 cores and 28 threads, a base clock of 2.10 GHz, boosting to 5.30 GHz. The EPYC's cache layout is 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 128 MB shared L3. The Intel part has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB shared L3. The EPYC's L3 is more than four times larger, which helps explain its wins in data compression and encryption.

Memory support differs sharply. The EPYC supports DDR4 with an eight-channel memory bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. The Intel part supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus, and no bandwidth figure is recorded in the database. ECC memory is supported by both. PCIe connectivity also differs: the EPYC offers Gen 4 with 128 lanes, the Intel part offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes. The EPYC has no integrated graphics, while the Intel part includes UHD Graphics 770. The EPYC uses an AMD Socket SP3, the Intel part uses Intel BGA 1964. The EPYC is not multiplier unlocked; the Intel part is.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core i7-13850HX has 20 cores and 28 threads. The AMD EPYC 7313P has 16 cores and 32 threads.

Q: Which processor wins in single-threaded benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i7-13850HX wins the Passmark single-thread tests with a score of 3769 versus 2634 for the AMD EPYC 7313P, a 30.1% advantage. However, the EPYC wins all Cinebench single-core tests, including a 14% edge in Cinebench R15 singlecore.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD EPYC 7313P has 128 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core i7-13850HX has 30 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD EPYC 7313P and the Intel Core i7-13850HX support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i7-13850HX includes UHD Graphics 770. The AMD EPYC 7313P does not have integrated graphics.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The AMD EPYC 7313P has an average benchmark score of 53206. The Intel Core i7-13850HX has an average benchmark score of 50761.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7313P is the clear winner in rendering workloads, taking every Cinebench test by 13.9% or 14%. It wins data compression by 19.6%, encryption by 37.1%, extended instructions by 23.3%, integer math by 14.7%, multithread by 11.5%, physics by 70.3%, random string sorting by 27.2%, and find prime numbers by 88%. For server workloads, workstation rendering, database operations, compression tasks, cryptography, and any integer-heavy computation, the EPYC 7313P is the processor the data supports. Its 128 MB L3 cache and 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth are likely contributors to these wins, especially in the cache-sensitive tests like find prime numbers and physics.

The Intel Core i7-13850HX wins in floating point math by 10.9% and in both Passmark single-thread tests by 30.1%. For applications that depend on floating point throughput, or tasks where a single thread's speed is the limiting factor, the Intel part is the better choice. The Intel part also has integrated graphics, making it functional in systems without a discrete GPU, and it is multiplier unlocked for overclocking. The Intel part is the mobile-oriented design with a 55 TDP versus the EPYC's 155 TDP, though the database records no power consumption measurements in the head-to-head data.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. The AMD EPYC 7313P uses 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core i7-13850HX uses 20 cores and 28 threads. The EPYC has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz; the Intel part has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The EPYC has a TDP of 155, the Intel part has a TDP of 55. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3, the Intel part uses Intel BGA 1964. The EPYC is Zen 3 (Milan) on a 7 nm TSMC process; the Intel part is Raptor Lake-HX on a 10 nm Intel process. The EPYC has 16,600 million transistors and a die size of 4x 81 mm²; the Intel part has no recorded transistor count and a die size of 257 mm².

Cache configurations differ: the EPYC has 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 128 MB shared L3; the Intel part has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB shared L3. Memory support favors the EPYC with eight-channel DDR4 and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and no recorded bandwidth. PCIe capability is Gen 4 with 128 lanes on the EPYC versus Gen 5 with 20 lanes on the Intel part. The EPYC has no integrated graphics; the Intel part has UHD Graphics 770. The EPYC is not multiplier unlocked; the Intel part is. The EPYC launched in March 2021, the Intel part in January 2023. The EPYC's launch MSRP is $913, while the Intel part's launch MSRP is $428.