AMD EPYC 73F3 vs Intel Core i5-1145G7 Comparison

The AMD EPYC 73F3 and Intel Core i5-1145G7 occupy opposite ends of the computing spectrum, yet their average benchmark scores place them within striking distance of each other. The EPYC 73F3 averages 11334 points, while the Core i5-1145G7 averages 11279, a difference of just 0.5%. This proximity in aggregate scores is misleading, however, as the two processors are engineered for entirely different workloads. The data reveals a server-class, 16-core Zen 3 beast going head-to-head with a 4-core mobile Tiger Lake chip, and the benchmark results show a complete sweep in one direction.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results are unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 73F3 wins every single test, and it wins by a massive margin. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC scores 3949 against the Intel’s 783, a delta of 404.3%. The single-core R15 test tells a similar story, with the EPYC at 557 and the Intel at 110, a 406.4% advantage. These are not close contests; the EPYC is delivering roughly five times the performance in these rendering workloads.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern holds exactly. The EPYC 73F3 scores 16458 in multi-core versus 3266 for the Core i5-1145G7, a 403.9% delta. The single-core R20 result is 2323 against 461, again a 403.9% difference. Cinebench R23 continues the trend: the EPYC posts 39187 in multi-core and 5532 in single-core, while the Intel manages only 7777 and 1098 respectively. The deltas are 403.9% and 403.8%, nearly identical to the R20 margins. The consistency of these percentages across R15, R20, and R23 suggests a fixed performance ratio between the two chips in this benchmark family.

What stands out is that the EPYC’s single-core advantage (around 404%) is just as large as its multi-core advantage. This is unusual, as server chips typically rely on core count for multi-threaded wins while mobile parts often close the gap in single-threaded tests. Here, the EPYC 73F3’s 4.00 GHz boost clock, combined with its Zen 3 architecture, is simply too strong for the Core i5-1145G7’s 4.40 GHz boost. The Intel part’s higher clock speed does not translate into a win anywhere. The head-to-head table shows 6 wins for the AMD processor and 0 for the Intel, making this a complete sweep.

Architecture Differences

The foundational difference is the core count: the EPYC 73F3 has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Core i5-1145G7 has 4 cores and 8 threads. This 4x core advantage is the primary driver of the multi-core benchmark results. The EPYC uses AMD’s Zen 3 architecture on a 7 nm TSMC process, with a die size listed as 8x 81 mm² and a transistor count of 33,200 million. The Intel part uses Tiger Lake architecture (Willow Cove-U cores) on Intel’s 10 nm process, with a 144 mm² die size and no transistor count listed.

Cache configurations are wildly different. The EPYC 73F3 has 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 256 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core i5-1145G7 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and only 8 MB of shared L3. The EPYC’s 256 MB L3 is 32 times larger than the Intel’s 8 MB, which helps explain its ability to feed 16 cores with data. The Intel part compensates with larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, but this does not overcome the core count deficit.

Memory support diverges sharply. The EPYC 73F3 uses DDR4 memory over an eight-channel bus, providing 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core i5-1145G7 supports DDR4 and LPDDR4X over a dual-channel bus, with no bandwidth figure listed. ECC memory is supported on the EPYC but not on the Intel part. The EPYC also offers 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, versus just 4 lanes on the Intel chip. The Intel part includes integrated Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU, while the EPYC has no integrated graphics at all. The EPYC targets the Server/Workstation market and is still Active in production, while the Intel part is a Mobile chip that is End-of-life.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD EPYC 73F3 has an average benchmark score of 11334, which is 0.5% higher than the Intel Core i5-1145G7’s 11279. The EPYC 7402 sits between them at 11312, just 0.2% below the EPYC 73F3.

Q: How do the two compare in single-core performance?

A: The EPYC 73F3 wins every single-core Cinebench test. In R23 single-core, it scores 5532 versus 1098 for the Intel, a 403.8% advantage. The Intel’s higher boost clock of 4.40 GHz does not help it overcome the EPYC’s 4.00 GHz boost in these tests.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The EPYC 73F3 has 16 cores and 32 threads. The Core i5-1145G7 has 4 cores and 8 threads. This is a 4x difference in both cores and threads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 73F3 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i5-1145G7 does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The EPYC 73F3 provides 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth over an eight-channel DDR4 bus. The Core i5-1145G7 uses a dual-channel bus with DDR4 or LPDDR4X, and no bandwidth figure is listed.

Q: Are these processors still in production?

A: The AMD EPYC 73F3 is listed as Active in production. The Intel Core i5-1145G7 is listed as End-of-life.

Specification Differences

• Cores: 16 (EPYC 73F3) vs 4 (Core i5-1145G7)
• Threads: 32 vs 8
• Base Clock: 3.50 GHz vs 2.60 GHz
• Boost Clock: 4.00 GHz vs 4.40 GHz
• TDP: 240 W vs 28 W
• Socket: AMD Socket SP3 vs Intel BGA 1449
• Architecture: Zen 3 vs Tiger Lake (Willow Cove-U)
• Process Node: 7 nm (TSMC) vs 10 nm (Intel)
• Die Size: 8x 81 mm² vs 144 mm²
• Transistors: 33,200 million vs not listed
• L1 Cache: 64 KB per core vs 80 KB per core
• L2 Cache: 512 KB per core vs 1.25 MB per core
• L3 Cache: 256 MB shared vs 8 MB shared
• Memory Support: DDR4 vs DDR4, LPDDR4X
• Memory Bus: Eight-channel vs Dual-channel
• Memory Bandwidth: 204.8 GB/s vs not listed
• ECC Memory: Yes vs No
• PCIe: Gen 4, 128 Lanes vs Gen 4, 4 Lanes
• Integrated Graphics: None vs Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU
• Market Segment: Server/Workstation vs Mobile
• Production Status: Active vs End-of-life
• Release Date: 2021-03-14 vs 2020-09-01
• Launch MSRP: $3521 vs $309
• Part Number: 100-000000321100-100000321WOF vs SRK03

The Verdict

The data is one-sided. The AMD EPYC 73F3 wins all 6 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with deltas of approximately 404% across the board. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 39187 against the Intel’s 7777, meaning the EPYC delivers over 5 times the multi-threaded rendering performance. Even in single-core tests, where the Intel’s higher 4.40 GHz boost clock might be expected to help, the EPYC 73F3 leads by 403.8% in R23. This is not a case of a server chip merely flexing its core count; the EPYC’s single-core performance is also decisively superior.

The Intel Core i5-1145G7, by contrast, offers integrated Iris Xe graphics, a 28 W TDP, and a smaller 144 mm² die size. Its 8 MB L3 cache and dual-channel memory bus are appropriate for its mobile segment, but they cannot compete with the EPYC’s 256 MB L3 and eight-channel 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part’s average score of 11279 is remarkably close to the EPYC’s 11334, but this aggregate figure obscures the fact that the Intel chip achieves this with different benchmarks (Geekbench, Passmark) not present in the head-to-head list. In the Cinebench tests that both share, the EPYC wins every time.

For a builder choosing between these two, the decision is clear: the EPYC 73F3 is the performance pick in every measured category. The Intel part’s only advantages are its lower TDP, integrated graphics, and mobile form factor, none of which appear in the benchmark scores. The launch MSRP of $3521 for the EPYC versus $309 for the Intel reflects their different market positions, but the performance gap is far larger than the price gap would suggest.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 73F3 wins every benchmark where both processors have results. In Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both multi-core and single-core, the EPYC leads by roughly 404%. This makes it the clear choice for any workload that relies on Cinebench-style rendering, which typically scales with core count and raw IPC. The EPYC’s 16 cores, 32 threads, and 256 MB L3 cache are built for sustained multi-threaded compute, and the data confirms this is where it excels. Its 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth and 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes further support server and workstation tasks that move large datasets.

The Intel Core i5-1145G7 does not win a single head-to-head benchmark, but it does have strengths not captured in those numbers. Its integrated Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU means it can output video without a discrete GPU, a feature the EPYC lacks entirely. Its 28 W TDP makes it suitable for thin-and-light mobile systems, whereas the EPYC’s 240 W TDP requires a server platform. The Intel part also has a more recent release date in terms of its segment, though it is now End-of-life. For mobile users who need a capable CPU with integrated graphics and low power draw, the Core i5-1145G7 serves a purpose that the EPYC cannot fulfill. But in raw compute benchmarks, the EPYC 73F3 is the winner in every single test.