AMD EPYC 7351P vs Intel Core i9-7920X Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two processors into very distinct use cases. The AMD EPYC 7351P takes six of the eight head-to-head benchmark wins, and every one of those wins comes from Cinebench. Across all four Cinebench versions tested (R15, R20, and R23, each with single-core and multi-core runs), the EPYC 7351P wins consistently by roughly 9.6% to 9.7%. That includes a 2231 versus 2015 result in Cinebench R15 multi-core, a 9296 versus 8396 in R20 multi-core, and a 22135 versus 19991 in R23 multi-core. The single-core Cinebench results follow the same pattern, with the EPYC posting 314 versus 284 in R15, 1312 versus 1185 in R20, and 3125 versus 2822 in R23.

The Intel Core i9-7920X wins the other two benchmarks, and it wins them by enormous margins. In Geekbench multi-core, the Intel scores 9297 against the EPYC's 4607, a 101.8% advantage. In Geekbench single-core, Intel leads 1394 to 733, a 90.2% gap. These are not marginal differences; they point to a fundamental divergence in how the two chips respond to different benchmark workloads. Anyone whose software suite resembles Geekbench's testing methodology would see massive gains from the Intel part, while anyone whose work resembles Cinebench would find the AMD part consistently faster.

The overall average benchmark scores reflect this split. The Intel i9-7920X has an average benchmark score of 5673 across all recorded tests, while the EPYC 7351P sits at 5469. Both land at the 61st percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they occupy the same tier overall, but the distribution of their strengths could not be more different. The Intel part's average is pulled up by its two dominant Geekbench wins; the EPYC's average is buoyed by its six consistent Cinebench victories.

Architecture Differences

These are two very different designs sharing only a process node. Both use a 14 nm manufacturing process, but Intel fabricates the i9-7920X at its own foundry while AMD uses GlobalFoundries for the EPYC 7351P. The Intel chip is built on the Skylake architecture, specifically the Skylake-X codename, and belongs to the Core i9 X-Series 7th Generation family. The AMD chip uses the Zen architecture under the Naples codename, part of the EPYC 7001 series.

The core counts differ significantly. The EPYC 7351P has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the i9-7920X has 12 cores and 24 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the Intel chip runs at much higher clock speeds: its base clock is 2.90 GHz and its boost clock reaches 4.40 GHz, compared to the EPYC's 2.40 GHz base and 2.90 GHz boost. That 1.50 GHz boost advantage explains why the Intel part dominates the Geekbench single-core test so thoroughly.

Cache hierarchies are built on completely different philosophies. The Intel chip gives each core 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2, with a shared 16.5 MB L3 pool. The AMD chip gives each core 96 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2, but backs them with a massive 64 MB shared L3 cache. The die sizes reflect this divergence: Intel's die measures 484 mm², while AMD's measures 213 mm², though AMD packages 4,800 million transistors on its smaller die.

Memory architecture is another major split. The i9-7920X uses a quad-channel DDR4 memory bus with 85.3 GB/s of bandwidth, while the EPYC 7351P uses an eight-channel DDR4 bus with 170.6 GB/s, exactly double the bandwidth. The EPYC also supports ECC memory while the Intel part does not. The EPYC sits in the server/workstation market segment on AMD Socket SP3, while the Intel part is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 2066. Both have unlocked multipliers, but the Intel part carries 44 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU while the EPYC's PCIe configuration is listed only as Gen 3 without a lane count in the database.

The release dates differ by a few months. The EPYC 7351P launched on 2017-06-28, and the i9-7920X launched on 2017-09-09. The Intel part is now end-of-life, while the EPYC remains in active production.

The Verdict

The data tells a clear story for different buyers. If your work is rendering, 3D modeling, or any workload that behaves like Cinebench, the AMD EPYC 7351P is the pick. It wins every Cinebench test in the database by roughly 9.7%, and that consistency across single-core and multi-core runs means it is not just a core-count advantage; the EPYC is simply faster at these tasks across the board. The 16-core, 32-thread configuration with its 64 MB L3 cache and 170.6 GB/s memory bandwidth clearly suits this type of sustained compute.

If your work resembles Geekbench's test patterns, the Intel Core i9-7920X is the only rational choice. The 101.8% multi-core lead and 90.2% single-core lead are overwhelming. The i9-7920X's 4.40 GHz boost clock and 2.90 GHz base clock give it a clock speed advantage that the EPYC cannot overcome in this benchmark, regardless of the EPYC's extra cores. The Intel chip also provides 44 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, which matters for systems with many expansion cards.

The market segment distinction reinforces this split. The EPYC 7351P is a server/workstation part with ECC memory support and eight-channel memory; the i9-7920X is a desktop part with quad-channel memory and no ECC. The EPYC is actively produced while the Intel part is end-of-life. For a new system today, the EPYC has the advantage of continued availability. For an existing Intel Socket 2066 platform, the i9-7920X remains a strong option in Geekbench-style workloads, but the data shows the EPYC is the stronger overall performer in the Cinebench family of tests that dominate the head-to-head comparison.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD EPYC 7351P scores 22135 against the Intel Core i9-7920X's 19991, a 9.7% advantage.

Q: Why does the Intel chip win Geekbench by such a large margin?

A: The Intel Core i9-7920X posts a 9297 multi-core score versus 4607 for the EPYC 7351P (101.8% higher) and a 1394 single-core score versus 733 (90.2% higher). The Intel chip's higher clock speeds, 2.90 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost versus 2.40 GHz and 2.90 GHz, are the likely driver.

Q: Do both CPUs have the same number of cores?

A: No. The AMD EPYC 7351P has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core i9-7920X has 12 cores and 24 threads.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7351P supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i9-7920X does not.

Q: How do their memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The AMD EPYC 7351P has an eight-channel DDR4 bus with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core i9-7920X has a quad-channel DDR4 bus with 85.3 GB/s, exactly half the bandwidth.

Q: Are both CPUs still in production?

A: No. The AMD EPYC 7351P is listed as active in production, while the Intel Core i9-7920X is end-of-life.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the entire comparison is Geekbench multi-core. The Intel Core i9-7920X scores 9297 while the AMD EPYC 7351P scores 4607, giving Intel a 101.8% advantage, more than double the EPYC's score. Geekbench single-core shows the same shape at a slightly smaller scale: 1394 versus 733, a 90.2% lead for Intel. These two wins are so large that they outweigh the EPYC's six wins in the overall average score calculation, putting the Intel part's average at 5673 versus 5469.

Every Cinebench result goes the other way, and they are remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC wins 2231 to 2015, a 9.7% margin. In R15 single-core, it wins 314 to 284, a 9.6% margin. Cinebench R20 multi-core sees the EPYC at 9296 versus 8396, again 9.7%. R20 single-core is 1312 versus 1185, 9.7%. Cinebench R23 multi-core gives 22135 versus 19991, 9.7%. R23 single-core gives 3125 versus 2822, also 9.7%. The consistency of that delta across every Cinebench iteration is notable; it suggests a stable architectural advantage for the EPYC in this workload family, not a result sensitive to specific test versions.

The nearest rivals in the database provide context for how these two chips sit in the broader market. The Intel i9-7920X's nearest rival is the AMD EPYC 7F32 with an average score of 5703, just 0.5% higher. The EPYC 7351P's nearest rival is the Intel Xeon W-1290P at 5443, 0.5% lower. Interestingly, the Intel i9-7920X is also close to the AMD EPYC 7351 (5710, 0.6% higher), the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X (5730, 1% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 (5610, 1.1% lower). The EPYC 7351P sits near the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920 (5425, 0.8% higher), the Intel Core i9-10900X (5555, 1.5% lower), and the Intel Celeron G6900 (5561, 1.7% lower). Both chips are competitive with their immediate peers, but their strengths point in opposite directions.

Specification Differences

The most consequential specification difference is the memory bus. The EPYC 7351P's eight-channel DDR4 configuration with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth doubles the i9-7920X's quad-channel 85.3 GB/s. This directly supports the EPYC's server/workstation positioning. Core and thread counts also differ: 16 cores and 32 threads for the EPYC versus 12 cores and 24 threads for the Intel part. Clock speeds reverse the hierarchy, with the Intel chip running a 2.90 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost compared to the EPYC's 2.40 GHz base and 2.90 GHz boost.

Cache layouts are entirely different. The EPYC provides 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a 64 MB shared L3. The Intel part provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a 16.5 MB shared L3. The EPYC's L3 cache is nearly four times larger. Die size also differs substantially: 484 mm² for Intel versus 213 mm² for AMD, with AMD's die containing 4,800 million transistors.

Power envelopes differ, with the EPYC rated at 170W TDP and the Intel part at 140W. Sockets are incompatible: Intel Socket 2066 for the i9-7920X, AMD Socket SP3 for the EPYC. ECC memory support is exclusive to the EPYC. The Intel part has 44 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, while the EPYC's PCIe support is listed simply as Gen 3. The Intel part carries a launch MSRP of $1199, while the EPYC has no launch MSRP recorded. Production status separates them as well: the Intel chip is end-of-life, the EPYC is active. The Intel part's part number is SR3NG, and the EPYC's is PS735PBEVGPAF. Both have unlocked multipliers, both support DDR4 memory, and neither has integrated graphics.