AMD EPYC 7351P vs Intel Core i5-13400T Comparison

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split between these two processors. The AMD EPYC 7351P is the decisive winner in Cinebench workloads, taking all six multi-core and single-core tests in that suite. It leads by a consistent 30% margin in each of the R15, R20, and R23 tests, both for single and multi-threaded performance. This makes it the stronger choice for sustained, heavily threaded rendering tasks where Cinebench-style performance is the primary metric.

The Intel Core i5-13400T, however, dominates the Geekbench tests. It scores 10,227 in Geekbench multi-core versus 4,607 for the EPYC, a 55% advantage. In Geekbench single-core, the Intel leads with 1,899 against 733, a 61.4% delta. This indicates the Intel part is significantly stronger in workloads that reflect Geekbench's mixed, latency-sensitive test patterns. Users prioritizing those specific benchmarks should choose the Intel.

The overall average benchmark scores are close. The EPYC's average is 5,469, placing it at the 61st percentile of all CPUs. The Intel's average is 5,210, at the 60th percentile. Both processors sit in the same performance tier overall, but they achieve that status through very different strengths. The EPYC wins 6 of the 8 head-to-head tests, but the two tests it loses are by much larger margins than the ones it wins. The final choice depends entirely on which benchmark suite reflects the user's actual applications.

Architecture Differences

The two chips are built on fundamentally different architectures. The AMD EPYC 7351P uses the Zen architecture from the EPYC 7001 series, codenamed Naples. It is fabricated on a 14 nm process by GlobalFoundries and packs 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. The Intel Core i5-13400T uses the Raptor Lake architecture from the Core 13th Gen series, specifically Raptor Lake-S. It is built on a 10 nm process by Intel with a die size of 215 mm².

The EPYC is a server-class part with 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel is a desktop part with 10 cores and 16 threads. The EPYC's cache hierarchy uses 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a large 64 MB shared L3 cache. The Intel uses 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a smaller 20 MB shared L3 cache. The larger L3 on the AMD part is a notable advantage for certain server workloads.

Memory support diverges sharply. The EPYC supports DDR4 only, but it uses an eight-channel memory bus with a recorded bandwidth of 170.6 GB/s. The Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5, but it uses a dual-channel memory bus and has no memory bandwidth figure recorded. The EPYC also supports ECC memory, while the Intel does not. The EPYC uses PCIe Gen 3, while the Intel uses PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The Intel includes integrated UHD Graphics 730, while the EPYC has no integrated graphics.

The EPYC is unlocked for multiplier adjustment, while the Intel is locked. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3, while the Intel uses Intel Socket 1700. Their release dates are far apart: the EPYC launched in June 2017, while the Intel launched in January 2023. The Intel has a launch MSRP of $221. The EPYC has no launch MSRP recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD EPYC 7351P is faster. It scores 22,135 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 30% ahead of the Intel Core i5-13400T's score of 17,029.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-13400T win any benchmark?

A: Yes. The Intel wins the Geekbench multi-core test with a score of 10,227, which is 55% ahead of the EPYC's 4,607. It also wins Geekbench single-core with 1,899 against 733, a 61.4% advantage.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The AMD EPYC 7351P has 16 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core i5-13400T has 10 cores and 16 threads. The EPYC has 6 more cores and 16 more threads.

Q: Do these processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The EPYC supports DDR4 only, with an eight-channel memory bus. The Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5, but with a dual-channel memory bus. The EPYC also supports ECC memory, while the Intel does not.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each processor?

A: The AMD EPYC 7351P has a TDP of 170 watts. The Intel Core i5-13400T has a TDP of 35 watts. The Intel part is designed for much lower power consumption.

Q: Which processor has the larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD EPYC 7351P has a 64 MB shared L3 cache. The Intel Core i5-13400T has a 20 MB shared L3 cache. The EPYC has triple the L3 capacity.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 7351P | Intel Core i5-13400T |

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

| Cores | 16 | 10 |

| Threads | 32 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.40 GHz | 1300.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2.90 GHz | 4.40 GHz |

| TDP | 170 watts | 35 watts |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Zen | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Naples | Raptor Lake-S |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Intel |

| Transistors | 4,800 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 213 mm² | 215 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 96 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

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

| L3 Cache | 64 MB (shared) | 20 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR4, DDR5 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 170.6 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 3 | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | None | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Release Date | 2017-06-28 | 2023-01-03 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $221 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results are uniformly in favor of the AMD EPYC 7351P. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC scores 2,231 versus 1,716 for the Intel, a 30% lead. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the EPYC scores 314 versus 242, a 29.8% lead. The pattern repeats in Cinebench R20: the EPYC scores 9,296 multi-core against 7,152, and 1,312 single-core against 1,009, both 30% leads. In Cinebench R23, the EPYC scores 22,135 multi-core against 17,029, and 3,125 single-core against 2,404, both again 30% leads. The consistency of the 30% delta across all Cinebench versions indicates a stable architectural advantage for the EPYC in this rendering workload.

The Geekbench results show a complete reversal. In Geekbench multi-core, the Intel Core i5-13400T scores 10,227 against the EPYC's 4,607. This is a 55% win for the Intel part. In Geekbench single-core, the Intel scores 1,899 against 733, a 61.4% win. These are the largest deltas recorded in the head-to-head comparison. The Intel's advantage in Geekbench is more than twice as large as the EPYC's advantage in Cinebench.

The overall win count is 6 to 2 in favor of the AMD EPYC 7351P. However, the magnitude of the Intel's wins is substantial. The EPYC wins are all at a consistent 30% level, while the Intel wins are at 55% and 61.4%. This means the Intel's two wins contribute disproportionately to its overall competitiveness, even though it loses the majority of tests.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7351P wins in all recorded Cinebench tests, covering R15, R20, and R23 in both single and multi-core configurations. These tests are render-based and stress sustained computational throughput across all cores. The EPYC's 16 cores and 32 threads, combined with its 64 MB L3 cache and eight-channel memory bandwidth of 170.6 GB/s, support this dominance. The data indicates the EPYC is the better choice for applications that rely on long-running, heavily threaded rendering or compute tasks that behave like Cinebench.

The Intel Core i5-13400T wins in Geekbench, both multi-core and single-core. Geekbench tests a wider variety of workloads, including encryption, image processing, and machine learning tasks, with a focus on latency and responsiveness. The Intel's higher boost clock of 4.40 GHz, compared to the EPYC's 2.90 GHz, likely contributes to its single-core strength. Its support for DDR5 memory and PCIe Gen 5 may also factor into its Geekbench performance. The data indicates the Intel is the better choice for desktop-oriented, mixed-use applications that resemble Geekbench's test patterns.

The market segments support this split. The EPYC is a server/workstation part, designed for consistent throughput in professional environments. The Intel is a desktop part, designed for responsive, varied workloads. The EPYC's ECC memory support and eight-channel memory bus reinforce its server positioning. The Intel's integrated UHD Graphics 730 and lower 35-watt TDP reinforce its desktop positioning. Users should select based on which benchmark suite more closely matches their primary software. If the workload is Cinebench-like, the EPYC is the clear winner. If the workload is Geekbench-like, the Intel is the clear winner. The 61st percentile ranking for the EPYC and 60th percentile for the Intel confirm they are closely matched overall, but with opposite strengths.