AMD EPYC 7371 vs Intel Core i5-7400 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents an unambiguous picture: the AMD EPYC 7371 wins every head-to-head benchmark in this comparison, taking all six contests against the Intel Core i5-7400. The scale of the victory is massive, with the EPYC 7371 leading by margins between 461.7% and 464% across all Cinebench tests. For workloads that scale with core count and thread count, the EPYC 7371 is the only sensible choice. The data shows a 16-core, 32-thread server processor versus a 4-core, 4-thread desktop chip; there is no benchmark category where the Core i5-7400 comes out ahead.

However, the choice is not purely about raw performance. The EPYC 7371 draws 170 W of power, while the Core i5-7400 is rated at 65 W. The EPYC 7371 sits in AMD Socket SP3, requires eight-channel memory, and targets the Server/Workstation segment. The Core i5-7400 uses Intel Socket 1151, runs dual-channel memory, and targets desktops. For a user building a compact desktop or a system where power efficiency and integrated graphics matter, the Core i5-7400 offers the HD 630 iGPU, which the EPYC 7371 completely lacks. The verdict: pick the EPYC 7371 for heavy multi-threaded server or workstation tasks; pick the Core i5-7400 only if the workload is light, the platform budget is constrained by socket and memory requirements, or an integrated GPU is mandatory.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different design philosophies. The AMD EPYC 7371 uses the Zen architecture under the codename Naples, belonging to the EPYC 7001 series. It is built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with 4,800 million transistors packed into a 213 mm² die. The Intel Core i5-7400 uses Kaby Lake architecture, also on a 14 nm process, but fabricated by Intel; the transistor count and die size are not listed in the data.

Core and thread counts diverge sharply: the EPYC 7371 provides 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Core i5-7400 provides 4 cores and 4 threads. The EPYC 7371’s cache hierarchy is far larger: 96 KB L1 and 512 KB L2 per core, plus 64 MB shared L3. The Core i5-7400 has 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, with only 6 MB shared L3. Memory support also differs fundamentally. Both support DDR4, but the EPYC 7371 uses an eight-channel memory bus with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core i5-7400 uses a dual-channel bus at 38.4 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on the EPYC 7371 but not on the Core i5-7400.

PCIe generation is the same (Gen 3), but the lane configuration differs: the EPYC 7371 is a server platform with full PCIe capability, while the Core i5-7400 lists "Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only)". The Core i5-7400 integrates HD 630 graphics; the EPYC 7371 has no integrated graphics at all. The EPYC 7371 has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core i5-7400 is locked. Release dates are roughly two years apart: the EPYC 7371 launched in November 2018, the Core i5-7400 in January 2017. Both are still marked as active production parts.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data covers six Cinebench tests, all of which the AMD EPYC 7371 wins by a wide margin. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the EPYC 7371 scores 2637 against the Core i5-7400’s 469, a 462.3% advantage. The single-core R15 test shows a similar gap: 372 versus 66, a 463.6% delta. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multicore result is 10988 versus 1956 (461.8% ahead), and the single-core result is 1551 versus 275 (464% ahead). In Cinebench R23, the multicore scores are 26164 versus 4658 (461.7% ahead), and single-core scores are 3693 versus 657 (462.1% ahead).

The pattern is consistent: the EPYC 7371 leads by roughly 460-464% in every test, regardless of whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded. This uniformity is notable. The Core i5-7400’s single-core performance does not close the gap, which suggests the EPYC 7371’s higher base clock (3.10 GHz vs 3.00 GHz) and boost clock (3.80 GHz vs 3.50 GHz) contribute meaningfully, but the architecture’s per-core efficiency on this workload also matters. The single-core scores are not merely "close"; they are comprehensively beaten.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this: the EPYC 7371 has an average score of 7568, while the Core i5-7400 sits at 7469. According to the nearest rivals data, the EPYC 7371 is 1.3% ahead of the Core i5-7400 in average score, which is a much smaller margin than the Cinebench deltas. This discrepancy is because the Core i5-7400 has additional benchmark results in the data (Geekbench, PassMark tests) that are not included in the head-to-head set, and those scores pull its average upward relative to the Cinebench-only comparison. Still, the head-to-head Cinebench results are the most direct comparison, and they are lopsided.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7371 has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core i5-7400 has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What is the performance difference in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The EPYC 7371 scores 26164, while the Core i5-7400 scores 4658, giving the EPYC a 461.7% lead.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7371 supports ECC memory; the Intel Core i5-7400 does not.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i5-7400 includes integrated graphics (HD 630). The AMD EPYC 7371 has no integrated graphics.

Q: What are the memory bus widths?

A: The EPYC 7371 uses an eight-channel memory bus with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core i5-7400 uses a dual-channel bus at 38.4 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The EPYC 7371 boosts to 3.80 GHz, while the Core i5-7400 boosts to 3.50 GHz.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7371 wins every benchmark in the head-to-head set, but the context matters. The data shows it is designed for server and workstation workloads. Its 16 cores and 32 threads, combined with 64 MB of L3 cache and eight-channel memory bandwidth, make it suited for virtualization, database processing, and compute-heavy parallel tasks. The 170.6 GB/s memory bandwidth is over four times that of the Core i5-7400, which supports memory-intensive workloads. The ECC memory support adds reliability for long-running server processes. The unlocked multiplier also allows tuning, though this is secondary to the core count.

The Intel Core i5-7400 wins in platform-level considerations that are not captured in the Cinebench scores. It has a much lower TDP of 65 W versus 170 W, meaning simpler cooling and lower power draw. It includes integrated HD 630 graphics, so a discrete GPU is unnecessary for basic display output. The dual-channel memory bus is sufficient for typical desktop tasks. The socket (Intel Socket 1151) is compatible with mainstream desktop motherboards, whereas the EPYC 7371 requires AMD Socket SP3, which is a server-class platform. For a home desktop used for browsing, office work, or light gaming, the Core i5-7400’s lower power, integrated graphics, and desktop socket make it the practical choice, despite its far lower benchmark scores.

The nearest-rivals data also puts each processor in context. The EPYC 7371’s average score of 7568 is nearly identical to the Intel Core i5-6500 (7569), and it is 0.1% behind the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX (7578). The Core i5-7400’s average of 7469 places it 0.6% ahead of the Intel Core i5-4570 (7421) and 0.7% ahead of the Intel Core i9-9990XE (7415). These comparisons show that both processors sit in the 63rd percentile of all CPUs, but their benchmark profiles are entirely different: the EPYC 7371 achieves its average score through massive multi-threaded throughput, while the Core i5-7400 relies on a wider range of tests including PassMark integer and floating-point math.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors, based solely on the data provided:

• Cores: 16 (EPYC 7371) vs 4 (Core i5-7400)
• Threads: 32 vs 4
• Base clock: 3.10 GHz vs 3.00 GHz
• Boost clock: 3.80 GHz vs 3.50 GHz
• TDP: 170 W vs 65 W
• Socket: AMD Socket SP3 vs Intel Socket 1151
• Architecture: Zen vs Kaby Lake
• Codename: Naples vs Kaby Lake
• Generation: EPYC (Zen (Naples)) vs Core i5 (Kaby Lake)
• Foundry: GlobalFoundries vs Intel
• Transistors: 4,800 million (EPYC) vs not listed
• Die size: 213 mm² (EPYC) vs not listed
• L1 cache: 96 KB per core vs 64 KB per core
• L2 cache: 512 KB per core vs 256 KB per core
• L3 cache: 64 MB shared vs 6 MB shared
• Memory bus: Eight-channel vs Dual-channel
• Memory bandwidth: 170.6 GB/s vs 38.4 GB/s
• ECC memory: true vs false
• PCIe: Gen 3 (EPYC, no lane count listed) vs Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only)
• Integrated graphics: none vs HD 630
• Market segment: Server/Workstation vs Desktop
• Release date: 2018-11-15 vs 2017-01-02
• Multiplier unlocked: true vs false
• Part number: PS7371BEVGPAF vs SR32W

Both processors share the same process node (14 nm), memory support (DDR4), and production status (Active). The EPYC 7371 has no launch MSRP listed, and neither does the Core i5-7400. The EPYC 7371’s average benchmark score is 7568, slightly higher than the Core i5-7400’s 7469, and both sit at the 63rd percentile of all CPUs.