AMD EPYC 7402 vs Intel Core i7-4790 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a complete sweep: the AMD EPYC 7402 wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core i7-4790. The margins are substantial across every test, though the pattern is unusually consistent.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the EPYC 7402 scores 3942 against 621 for the i7-4790, a 534.8% advantage. The single-core R15 result is similar: 556 versus 87, a 539.1% gap. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multicore test shows 16426 against 2591 (534% delta), while single-core shows 2318 versus 365 (535.1% delta). Cinebench R23 multicore delivers 39110 versus 6171 (533.8% delta), and single-core shows 5521 versus 871 (533.9% delta).

The narrowest margin is R23 multicore at 533.8%, and the widest is R15 single-core at 539.1%. The deltas cluster tightly between 533.8% and 539.1%, indicating the performance relationship is consistent regardless of workload type. This is not a case where one chip excels in specific scenarios; the EPYC 7402 is uniformly ahead by roughly 5.3x to 5.4x across all Cinebench iterations.

The average benchmark score tells a slightly different story. The EPYC 7402 averages 11312 across its recorded benchmarks, while the i7-4790 averages 10556. That difference is only 7.2%, far smaller than the Cinebench deltas. This discrepancy arises because the i7-4790 has additional benchmark data (Geekbench and Passmark tests) that the EPYC 7402 lacks in this database, pulling its average closer. The Cinebench comparisons remain the cleanest direct apples-to-apples data.

Both processors sit at the 66th percentile among all CPUs in the database, an unusual coincidence given their vastly different market positions and release dates. The i7-4790's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7D12 (0.1% ahead), AMD EPYC 7502P (0.4% ahead), Intel Xeon W-3175X (1.8% behind), and Intel Xeon Gold 6338N (2% behind). The EPYC 7402's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 73F3 (0.2% behind), Intel Core i5-1145G7 (0.3% ahead), AMD EPYC 7452 (0.3% ahead), and Intel Core i3-1305U (1% ahead).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD EPYC 7402 scores 5521, while the Intel Core i7-4790 scores 871. The EPYC 7402 leads by 533.9%.

Q: How do the two compare in terms of multi-threaded Cinebench R20 performance?

A: The EPYC 7402 scores 16426, and the i7-4790 scores 2591. The EPYC 7402 leads by 534%.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The AMD EPYC 7402 averages 11312, while the Intel Core i7-4790 averages 10556. The EPYC 7402 is about 7.2% higher on average.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7402 has 24 cores and 48 threads. The Intel Core i7-4790 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What are the TDP values for these two processors?

A: The AMD EPYC 7402 has a TDP of 180, and the Intel Core i7-4790 has a TDP of 84.

Q: Is the Intel Core i7-4790 still in production?

A: No, the database lists it as end-of-life. The AMD EPYC 7402 is listed as active.

The Verdict

The data supports an unambiguous choice for raw performance: the AMD EPYC 7402 wins every recorded benchmark comparison. The Cinebench suite, which includes both single-core and multicore tests across three versions (R15, R20, R23), shows the EPYC 7402 ahead by margins between 533.8% and 539.1%. No test in the database favors the Intel Core i7-4790.

The i7-4790 is a 2014-era desktop processor with 4 cores and 8 threads, while the EPYC 7402 is a 2019-era server processor with 24 cores and 48 threads. The core count difference (6x more cores, 6x more threads) explains the multicore dominance, but the single-core results also favor the EPYC 7402 by over 5.3x, meaning the newer architecture is faster even on a per-thread basis.

The i7-4790 does hold one advantage in the recorded data: its average benchmark score of 10556 versus 11312 for the EPYC 7402 is only a 7.2% gap, suggesting the i7-4790 remains competitive in certain workloads (Geekbench and Passmark tests) that are not directly comparable to the Cinebench results. However, the only true head-to-head data points are Cinebench, and those all favor the EPYC 7402.

A user choosing between these two processors should select the EPYC 7402 for any workload that benefits from multi-core scaling, which includes most modern rendering, compilation, and server-side tasks. The i7-4790 could be considered for legacy desktop systems where the lower TDP (84 versus 180) and integrated graphics (Intel HD 4600) are relevant, but the benchmark data does not show any scenario where the i7-4790 outperforms the EPYC 7402.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every recorded specification. The AMD EPYC 7402 uses 24 cores and 48 threads, while the Intel Core i7-4790 uses 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 2.80 GHz for the EPYC 7402 and 3.60 GHz for the i7-4790. Boost clocks are 3.35 GHz and 4.00 GHz respectively. The EPYC 7402 has a TDP of 180, and the i7-4790 has a TDP of 84.

Socket types differ completely: the EPYC 7402 uses AMD Socket SP3, while the i7-4790 uses Intel Socket 1150. Memory support is DDR4 for the EPYC 7402 and DDR3 for the i7-4790. The EPYC 7402 has an eight-channel memory bus with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth; the i7-4790 has a dual-channel bus with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory is supported on the EPYC 7402 but not on the i7-4790.

PCIe connectivity differs: the EPYC 7402 offers Gen 4 with 128 lanes, while the i7-4790 offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The i7-4790 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 4600), while the EPYC 7402 has none. The EPYC 7402 is listed as active production, while the i7-4790 is end-of-life. Release dates are 2019-08-06 for the EPYC 7402 and 2014-04-30 for the i7-4790. The launch MSRP for the EPYC 7402 is $1783; the launch MSRP for the i7-4790 is $312.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap reflects their generations. The AMD EPYC 7402 uses the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Rome, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 15,200 million transistors across a 4x 74 mm² die configuration. Cache layout includes 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 32 MB L3 per die, totaling 128 MB L3.

The Intel Core i7-4790 uses the Haswell architecture on a 22 nm process at Intel. It contains 1,400 million transistors on a 177 mm² die. Cache layout includes 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3.

The EPYC 7402's L3 cache of 128 MB is 16 times larger than the i7-4790's 8 MB. The process node difference (7 nm versus 22 nm) allows the EPYC 7402 to pack significantly more transistors and cores into a similar thermal envelope context, though the TDP is higher at 180 versus 84. The EPYC 7402's eight-channel memory architecture versus the i7-4790's dual-channel gives it 8 times the memory bandwidth (204.8 GB/s versus 25.6 GB/s).

The EPYC 7402 is a server/workstation processor with no integrated graphics, while the i7-4790 is a desktop processor with Intel HD 4600. The EPYC 7402's PCIe Gen 4 support with 128 lanes is a generation ahead of the i7-4790's PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. Both processors have locked multipliers.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7402 wins all six recorded head-to-head benchmarks. These include Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multicore variants. The multicore wins are expected given the 24-core versus 4-core configuration, but the single-core wins are notable: the EPYC 7402 leads by 539.1% in R15 single-core, 535.1% in R20 single-core, and 533.9% in R23 single-core.

The Intel Core i7-4790 does not win any head-to-head comparison. Its recorded strengths are in the broader benchmark suite: Geekbench multicore (3927), Geekbench single-core (1164), and several Passmark tests including data compression (109623), data encryption (2035), extended instructions (6835), find prime numbers (32), floating point math (13104), integer math (26129), multithread (7264), physics (498), random string sorting (14790), and single-thread (2228). These scores contribute to its average of 10556, which is only 7.2% below the EPYC 7402's average of 11312.

The EPYC 7402 is the clear choice for server workloads, multi-threaded rendering, and any task that scales with core count. Its 128 MB L3 cache and eight-channel memory bandwidth make it suited for data-intensive applications. The i7-4790, despite being end-of-life, maintains a presence in the database through its Passmark and Geekbench scores, which cover a different set of tasks than Cinebench. For a desktop user running legacy single-threaded applications or tasks that fit within 4 cores, the i7-4790's higher base clock (3.60 GHz) and boost clock (4.00 GHz) provide a different performance profile, though the recorded single-core Cinebench numbers still favor the EPYC 7402 by a wide margin.

The data supports a clear split: the EPYC 7402 for modern multi-core workloads, and the i7-4790 for legacy desktop scenarios where its lower TDP and integrated graphics matter. The benchmark results do not show any workload where the i7-4790 outperforms the EPYC 7402 in a direct comparison.