AMD EPYC 7402 vs Intel Core i7-1185G7 Comparison

The Intel Core i7-1185G7 and AMD EPYC 7402 are not competitors in any practical sense; they are built for entirely different segments of the market. The data shows a complete sweep for the EPYC 7402 across every shared benchmark, with the Intel part trailing by roughly 78.5% in all tests. This comparison is not about which chip is "better" at the same job, but rather about understanding what each processor’s architectural priorities deliver. The verdict is straightforward: the EPYC 7402 is for massive parallel workloads, while the i7-1185G7 is a low-power mobile chip that trades absolute performance for portability and efficiency.

The Verdict

Choose the AMD EPYC 7402 if your workload scales with core count. It wins every single head-to-head benchmark by a landslide, and its 48 threads make it a clear choice for server virtualization, database hosting, and heavily threaded compute tasks. The data shows it delivers 39,110 in Cinebench R23 multi-core versus the Intel’s 8,416, a 78.5% margin. If you are building or populating a server rack, the EPYC is the only rational pick from this data.

Choose the Intel Core i7-1185G7 if you are assembling a thin-and-light laptop. Its 28W TDP and integrated Iris Xe-LP Graphics G7 96EU make it a mobile-first part, and while it loses every benchmark here, it does so while offering a feature the EPYC lacks: integrated graphics. The EPYC has no integrated GPU, so it cannot run a display without a separate graphics card. For a laptop user, the i7’s single-thread score of 1,188 in Cinebench R23 is low compared to the EPYC’s 5,521, but the i7 is not designed to win that fight; it is designed to fit in a BGA 1449 socket and run on battery power. If you need a server CPU, do not consider the i7. If you need a mobile CPU, the EPYC is physically impossible to use.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from opposite ends of the design spectrum. The Intel Core i7-1185G7 is a Tiger Lake-U part built on Intel’s 10 nm process, with a die size of 144 mm². It houses 4 cores and 8 threads, using the Willow Cove architecture. Its cache layout is generous for a mobile chip: 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. It supports dual-channel DDR4 or LPDDR4X memory, but does not support ECC. The PCIe implementation is Gen 4 with only 4 CPU lanes.

The AMD EPYC 7402 is a Zen 2 part from the EPYC 7002 series, built on TSMC’s 7 nm process. It is a massive chip, composed of four dies at 74 mm² each, with a total transistor count of 15,200 million. It packs 24 cores and 48 threads. Its cache is hierarchical: 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of L3 per die, totaling 128 MB of L3. Memory support is eight-channel DDR4, with a rated bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, and it fully supports ECC. It offers 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes. The foundry difference is notable: Intel uses its own fabs for the i7, while AMD uses TSMC for the EPYC. The EPYC also targets the Server/Workstation segment, while the i7 is strictly Mobile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unidirectional. The AMD EPYC 7402 wins all six shared tests, with the deltaPct holding at -78.5% or -78.6% for the Intel part. This consistency suggests the performance gap is structural, not workload-specific.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC scores 3,942 against the i7’s 848. That is a 78.5% deficit for Intel. The single-core test shows the EPYC at 556 versus Intel’s 119, a 78.6% gap. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core result is 16,426 for AMD versus 3,534 for Intel, and single-core is 2,318 versus 498. The R23 results follow the same pattern: 39,110 for AMD versus 8,416 for Intel in multi-core, and 5,521 versus 1,188 in single-core.

The most striking takeaway is that the EPYC wins even single-core tests by a wide margin. This is unexpected because single-core performance usually favors lower-power, higher-clock parts. The Intel chip boosts to 4.80 GHz, while the EPYC tops out at 3.35 GHz. Despite the 1.45 GHz clock advantage for Intel, the EPYC’s Zen 2 architecture still delivers roughly 4.6 times the single-core score in R23. This indicates that the EPYC’s IPC and memory bandwidth (204.8 GB/s versus dual-channel on Intel) more than compensate for its lower boost clock. The i7’s higher clock speed does not translate into a win anywhere in the data.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7402 has 24 cores and 48 threads. The Intel Core i7-1185G7 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Does the Intel chip have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the i7-1185G7 includes Iris Xe-LP Graphics G7 96EU. The EPYC 7402 has no integrated graphics, so it requires a separate GPU for display output.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7402 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i7-1185G7 does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The EPYC 7402 has an eight-channel memory bus with a rated bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. The i7-1185G7 has a dual-channel bus, and its bandwidth is not listed in the data.

Q: How big is the L3 cache difference?

A: The EPYC 7402 has 32 MB of L3 per die, totaling 128 MB across the chip. The i7-1185G7 has 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which chip has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i7-1185G7 has a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, which is higher than the EPYC 7402’s 3.35 GHz. Despite this, the EPYC wins all single-core benchmarks.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7402 wins every single benchmark in this comparison. If you are running Cinebench R15, R20, or R23, the EPYC is the only choice. Its 48 threads dominate multi-threaded rendering, and its 128 MB of L3 cache, combined with 204.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth, makes it a server workhorse. The data shows no workload where the Intel chip takes a victory. For any professional server deployment, database engine, or heavy virtualization host, the EPYC’s scores are the ones that matter. Its 24 physical cores and 48 threads are the headline feature, and the benchmark results confirm that more cores win outright.

The Intel Core i7-1185G7 wins in the categories that are not benchmarked here. It is a mobile chip with a 28W TDP, which makes it suitable for laptops where power draw and heat are constraints. Its integrated Iris Xe-LP Graphics G7 96EU means it can run a display without a discrete GPU, a feature the EPYC lacks entirely. It also uses a BGA 1449 socket, which is for soldered laptop motherboards, while the EPYC uses Socket SP3 for server boards. The i7’s 4.80 GHz boost clock is higher, but that does not translate into a benchmark win. If you need a low-power, mobile processor with graphics output, the i7 is the only viable option here because the EPYC physically cannot fit in that role.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in almost every measurable field. The Intel Core i7-1185G7 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD EPYC 7402 has 24 cores and 48 threads. Base clocks are close (3.00 GHz for Intel vs 2.80 GHz for AMD), but boost clocks diverge significantly: 4.80 GHz for Intel versus 3.35 GHz for AMD. TDP is a major differentiator: 28W for the i7 versus 180W for the EPYC.

The process node favors AMD: 7 nm (TSMC) versus 10 nm (Intel). Die size is 144 mm² for Intel, while AMD uses four dies at 74 mm² each. The EPYC has 15,200 million transistors; the i7 has no listed transistor count. Cache structures differ: Intel has 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 per core, with 12 MB shared L3. AMD has 64 KB L1 and 512 KB L2 per core, with 32 MB L3 per die and a total of 128 MB L3.

Memory support: both handle DDR4, but Intel adds LPDDR4X and uses a dual-channel bus, while AMD uses eight-channel DDR4 with a rated bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. ECC is only on the AMD part. PCIe lanes: 4 (Gen 4) for Intel versus 128 (Gen 4) for AMD. The i7 has integrated graphics; the EPYC does not. Sockets are entirely different: Intel BGA 1449 for mobile versus AMD Socket SP3 for servers. The market segments are Mobile versus Server/Workstation. The EPYC is listed as Active production, while the i7 is End-of-life. The release dates also differ: the i7 launched in September 2020, while the EPYC launched in August 2019.