CPU Comparison

The AMD EPYC 73F3 and Intel Core i7-6700 occupy different corners of the hardware world, and the benchmark data reflects that chasm. The EPYC 73F3 is an active, server-grade 16-core processor built on TSMC's 7 nm process, while the i7-6700 is an end-of-life, desktop-class 4-core chip from Intel's 14 nm Skylake generation. Across the six head-to-head Cinebench tests, the EPYC 73F3 wins every single matchup, often by margins exceeding 470%. The data shows a processor designed for massive parallel throughput against a legacy desktop part, and the scores leave no ambiguity about which one dominates in raw compute.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the EPYC 73F3 scores 39,187 against the i7-6700's 6,828. That is a 473.9% delta, meaning the EPYC delivers roughly five and a half times the multi-threaded rendering performance. The story is nearly identical in Cinebench R20 multi-core, with the EPYC at 16,458 versus 2,867, a 474% advantage. Even in the older Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the EPYC's 3,949 score dwarfs the i7-6700's 688, again a 474% gap. These are not incremental wins; they are generational and architectural sweeps.

Single-core results follow the same pattern, though with slightly different percentages. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC 73F3 scores 5,532, while the i7-6700 manages only 964, a 473.9% delta. The R20 single-core test shows 2,323 versus 404, a 475% advantage for the EPYC. The R15 single-core result is the largest relative gap in the entire dataset: 557 versus 96, a 480.2% delta. What is notable here is that the boost clocks are identical, both chips run at 4.00 GHz, yet the EPYC's Zen 3 architecture extracts vastly more instructions per cycle. The i7-6700's Skylake core, despite its age, cannot compete on IPC efficiency.

The EPYC's 16 cores and 32 threads give it a structural edge that no amount of clock tuning can overcome for the i7-6700. The EPYC also has a 256 MB shared L3 cache versus the i7-6700's 8 MB, and an eight-channel DDR4 memory bus with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth against the i7-6700's dual-channel 34.1 GB/s. These hardware differences translate directly into the benchmark deltas. The EPYC's average benchmark score is 11,334, placing it in the 67th percentile of all CPUs, while the i7-6700's average is 11,074, in the 66th percentile. The average scores are close, but the head-to-head Cinebench results are not, the EPYC wins all six tests with a 6-0 sweep.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split: the AMD EPYC 73F3 is the correct choice for anyone whose workload scales with cores and threads. Its 16-core, 32-thread configuration, combined with a 256 MB L3 cache and eight-channel memory, makes it a server/workstation part that can crush multi-threaded rendering, compilation, and virtualization tasks. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39,187 is more than five times the i7-6700's 6,828, and the 473.9% delta in that test alone justifies its positioning for heavy compute. The EPYC also wins on single-core performance despite matching the i7-6700's 4.00 GHz boost clock, which indicates superior architectural efficiency in Zen 3.

The Intel Core i7-6700, on the other hand, is a legacy desktop processor that was end-of-life even before the EPYC launched. Its 4 cores and 8 threads are adequate for basic desktop tasks, and its 65 W TDP is far lower than the EPYC's 240 W, but the benchmark results show it is outclassed in every compute scenario measured. The i7-6700's best Cinebench result is 6,828 in R23 multi-core, which is less than the EPYC's score in the same test by a factor of 5.7. The i7-6700 does have an integrated GPU (HD Graphics 530), which the EPYC lacks, and it supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, but neither of those features appears in the benchmark scores. For a user comparing purely on the data here, the EPYC 73F3 is the only rational pick for performance; the i7-6700 is a part that belongs in historical context, not a competitive benchmark comparison. The nearest rivals for the EPYC 73F3 include the AMD EPYC 7402 (0.2% higher average score) and the Intel Core i5-1145G7 (0.5% higher), while the i7-6700's closest competitors include the AMD EPYC 9224 (0.4% lower) and the AMD Ryzen 5 3500U (0.9% lower), none of which change the verdict here.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core Cinebench R23 performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 73F3 scores 39,187, while the Intel Core i7-6700 scores 6,828. The EPYC wins with a 473.9% delta.

Q: Is the Intel Core i7-6700 competitive in single-core tests?

A: No. The EPYC 73F3 scores 5,532 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 964 for the i7-6700, a 473.9% advantage. The single-core gap is consistent across R15 and R20 tests as well.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The EPYC 73F3 supports eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the i7-6700 uses dual-channel memory with 34.1 GB/s. The EPYC's bandwidth is roughly six times higher.

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-6700 have any benchmark wins over the EPYC 73F3?

A: In the head-to-head benchmark data, the EPYC 73F3 wins all six Cinebench tests. The i7-6700 has zero wins (winsB: 0) in this dataset.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The EPYC 73F3 has an average benchmark score of 11,334, and the i7-6700 has 11,074. The EPYC sits in the 67th percentile of all CPUs, while the i7-6700 is in the 66th.

Q: What is the production status of each processor?

A: The AMD EPYC 73F3 is listed as active, while the Intel Core i7-6700 is end-of-life.

Specification Differences

The core count is the most obvious differentiator: the EPYC 73F3 has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the i7-6700 has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are close, 3.50 GHz versus 3.40 GHz, and boost clocks are identical at 4.00 GHz. The TDPs differ substantially: the EPYC draws 240 W, the i7-6700 only 65 W. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3, while the i7-6700 uses Intel Socket 1151. The EPYC is a server/workstation part; the i7-6700 is a desktop part. The EPYC supports DDR4 memory with an eight-channel bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the i7-6700 supports DDR3 and DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and 34.1 GB/s. The EPYC has ECC memory support; the i7-6700 does not. The EPYC offers PCIe Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only), while the i7-6700 has PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The i7-6700 includes integrated HD Graphics 530; the EPYC has none. The EPYC is unlocked? No, both have multiplierUnlocked set to false. The EPYC's launch MSRP is $3521, and the i7-6700's is $303. The EPYC was released on 2021-03-14, and the i7-6700 on 2015-06-30.

Architecture Differences

The EPYC 73F3 is built on AMD's Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Milan, using a 7 nm process from TSMC. It packs 33,200 million transistors across 8x 81 mm² dies. The i7-6700 uses Intel's Skylake architecture on a 14 nm process from Intel's own foundry, with no transistor or die size data provided. The cache hierarchies differ sharply: the EPYC has 64 KB L1 and 512 KB L2 per core, plus a 256 MB shared L3 cache. The i7-6700 has 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, plus an 8 MB shared L3 cache. The EPYC's L3 is 32 times larger. The EPYC supports 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, enabling massive I/O expansion, while the i7-6700 is limited to 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. The EPYC's eight-channel memory controller and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth are designed for data-center workloads, whereas the i7-6700's dual-channel controller and 34.1 GB/s bandwidth serve a desktop market. The EPYC also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the i7-6700, and it lacks integrated graphics, relying on discrete GPUs or headless operation. The i7-6700's integrated HD Graphics 530 is a functional fallback for basic display output, but it does not contribute to the Cinebench CPU scores. The architectural gulf, 7 nm Zen 3 versus 14 nm Skylake, explains the consistent 474% benchmark deltas, even at identical boost clocks.