AMD EPYC 7402 vs Intel Core i3-1305U Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7402 and the Intel Core i3-1305U represent opposite poles of the processor market: a 24-core server behemoth designed for rack-mounted density and a 5-core mobile chip built for thin-and-light laptops. The benchmark data confirms this dichotomy, with the EPYC 7402 winning all six head-to-head Cinebench tests by margins exceeding 444%. However, the average benchmark score and percentile rankings tell a more nuanced story, placing both processors at the 66th percentile overall. This analysis dissects where each processor wins, what the scores mean, and how their specifications explain the performance gap.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 7402 is the undisputed champion of multi-threaded throughput. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39,110 is over 5.4 times higher than the i3-1305U's 7,183. This dominance extends across every rendering workload, with the EPYC 7402 leading by roughly 445% in all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests. For server workloads, database processing, or virtualization, the EPYC 7402's 24 cores and 48 threads provide the parallel execution headroom that no mobile chip can approach.

Conversely, the i3-1305U holds no wins in the head-to-head Cinebench suite. The data shows zero wins for the Intel part. However, the i3-1305U's advantage lies in its mobility and power envelope, not raw performance. With a 15W TDP versus the EPYC 7402's 180W, the i3-1305U can operate in fanless or low-noise designs where the EPYC 7402 would require substantial cooling infrastructure. The i3-1305U also includes integrated UHD Graphics 64EU, enabling display output and basic visual tasks without a discrete GPU—something the EPYC 7402 lacks entirely.

The PassMark results for the i3-1305U (not available for the EPYC 7402) show a balanced mobile profile: single-thread score of 3,115, integer math at 27,925, and floating-point math at 19,687. These figures indicate capable everyday computing for office applications and web browsing, though they are not competitive with the EPYC 7402's server-class throughput.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD EPYC 7402 scores 5,521 in Cinebench R23 single-core, which is 444.5% higher than the Intel Core i3-1305U's 1,014. The EPYC 7402 wins this test despite having a lower boost clock (3.35 GHz vs 4.50 GHz), indicating superior instructions-per-clock efficiency in this workload.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 7402 scores 39,110 versus the i3-1305U's 7,183, a delta of 444.5%. The gap is consistent across all Cinebench versions: 445.2% in R15 multi-core, 444.6% in R20 multi-core, and 444.5% in R23 multi-core.

Q: Do both processors have the same market position?

A: No. The EPYC 7402 targets Server/Workstation with a 180W TDP and AMD Socket SP3, while the i3-1305U is a Mobile part with a 15W TDP and Intel BGA 1744. Despite this, both sit at the 66th percentile of all CPUs in the database.

Q: What memory configurations do they support?

A: The EPYC 7402 supports DDR4 via an eight-channel memory bus with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory. The i3-1305U supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, but lacks ECC support and has no listed memory bandwidth figure in the data.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes?

A: The EPYC 7402 provides Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only), while the i3-1305U offers Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). This 16x difference in lane count makes the EPYC 7402 suitable for multi-GPU and high-speed storage configurations.

Q: Are these processors from the same generation?

A: No. The EPYC 7402 is from the EPYC 7002 series (Zen 2, Rome) released in August 2019. The i3-1305U belongs to the Core i3 (Raptor Lake-U) generation released in January 2023.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite provides a comprehensive view of CPU rendering performance, and the EPYC 7402 dominates every single test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7402 scores 3,942 against 723 for the i3-1305U, a 445.2% advantage. The R15 single-core test shows 556 versus 102, a 445.1% delta. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core score is 16,426 versus 3,016 (444.6% delta), and single-core is 2,318 versus 425 (445.4% delta). The newest Cinebench R23 results show 39,110 versus 7,183 in multi-core and 5,521 versus 1,014 in single-core, both with 444.5% deltas.

These percentages are remarkably consistent—hovering around 445% across all six tests. This uniformity suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-dependent. The EPYC 7402's 24 cores and 48 threads provide roughly 4.8 times the parallel execution resources of the i3-1305U's 5 cores and 6 threads. The single-core advantage (445.1% to 445.4%) is equally large, indicating that even with the i3-1305U's higher 4.50 GHz boost clock, the EPYC 7402's Zen 2 architecture delivers superior per-thread performance in these rendering workloads.

Looking at the nearest rivals for context, the EPYC 7402's average benchmark score of 11,312 places it just 0.2% behind the AMD EPYC 73F3 (11,334) and 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i5-1145G7 (11,279). The i3-1305U's average score of 11,200 is 1% behind the EPYC 7402, landing it between the AMD Ryzen 5 3500U (11,176) and the AMD EPYC 7542 (11,152). This close average scoring, despite the massive Cinebench deltas, reflects the broader benchmark mix where the i3-1305U's PassMark results contribute significantly to its overall standing.

Specification Differences

The core specification gap is the primary driver of performance differences. The EPYC 7402 features 24 cores and 48 threads, compared to the i3-1305U's 5 cores and 6 threads. This 4.8x core advantage directly explains the roughly 445% multi-core Cinebench deltas. The base clock differs dramatically: the EPYC 7402 runs at 2.80 GHz, while the i3-1305U has a much lower base of 1,600.00 MHz (1.60 GHz). However, the i3-1305U boosts to 4.50 GHz versus the EPYC 7402's 3.35 GHz, a 1.15 GHz advantage for the Intel part.

Thermal design power separates the two by an order of magnitude: 180W for the EPYC 7402 versus 15W for the i3-1305U. This 165W difference dictates their form factors—the EPYC 7402 requires active server cooling, while the i3-1305U can operate in passive or low-profile mobile designs. The sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket SP3 for the EPYC 7402 versus Intel BGA 1744 for the i3-1305U.

Memory support diverges significantly. The EPYC 7402 uses DDR4 with an eight-channel bus delivering 204.8 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support. The i3-1305U supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, but has no listed bandwidth figure and no ECC capability. PCIe connectivity shows a 16x lane difference: 128 Gen 4 lanes for the EPYC 7402 versus 8 Gen 4 lanes for the i3-1305U. The EPYC 7402 has no integrated graphics, while the i3-1305U includes UHD Graphics 64EU.

Architecture Differences

The EPYC 7402 is built on AMD's Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Rome, using a 7 nm process at TSMC. The chip contains 15,200 million transistors across a 4x 74 mm² die configuration. Its cache hierarchy includes 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 32 MB L3 per die, totaling 128 MB L3. The launch MSRP was $1783, reflecting its server positioning.

The i3-1305U uses Intel's Raptor Lake architecture, codenamed Raptor Lake-U, manufactured on a 10 nm process at Intel. Transistor count and die size are not listed in the data. The cache layout is distinct: 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 10 MB shared L3. This hybrid cache design is typical for Intel's recent mobile parts. The launch MSRP was $309.

The architectural philosophies diverge on core complexity. The EPYC 7402 uses 24 full-sized Zen 2 cores with simultaneous multithreading, prioritizing raw throughput and cache capacity. The i3-1305U employs a 5-core configuration (likely a mix of performance and efficiency cores typical of Raptor Lake) with 6 threads, emphasizing power efficiency and burst performance within a 15W envelope. The EPYC 7402's 128 MB total L3 cache dwarfs the i3-1305U's 10 MB shared L3, a 12.8x difference that benefits data-intensive server workloads.

The process node disparity—7 nm versus 10 nm—partially explains the EPYC 7402's ability to pack 24 cores at a 2.80 GHz base clock within a 180W TDP. The i3-1305U compensates with a 4.50 GHz boost clock, but the data shows this frequency advantage does not translate into Cinebench wins. Both processors lack an unlocked multiplier and use soldered or socketed mounting appropriate to their segments: SP3 for servers, BGA 1744 for mobile.

The production status for both is listed as Active, and neither offers a 3D V-Cache option. The EPYC 7402's part number is 100-000000046, while the i3-1305U uses SRMLT. These architectural differences, combined with the specification gaps, define two processors optimized for entirely different computing ecosystems—one for scale-up server density, the other for scale-out mobile efficiency.