AMD EPYC 7402P vs Intel Core i5-1035G1 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data tells a remarkably one-sided story. Across every single head-to-head test, the AMD EPYC 7402P dominates the Intel Core i5-1035G1 by an identical margin of 83.7%. That consistency is striking — whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded, the EPYC 7402P wins by the exact same percentage delta.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the EPYC 7402P scores 3749 against the Core i5-1035G1's 611. That is a 3138-point gap. The single-core R15 test shows a similar pattern: 529 for AMD versus 86 for Intel. Moving to Cinebench R20, the EPYC 7402P posts 15621 multicore and 2205 single-core, while the Intel part manages 2546 and 359 respectively. The R23 results continue the trend — the EPYC 7402P reaches 37195 multicore and 5251 single-core, dwarfing the Intel chip's 6062 and 855.

What is most notable is that the single-core advantage is just as large as the multicore advantage. In R23 single-core, the EPYC 7402P is 83.7% faster despite the Intel chip having a higher boost clock of 3.60 GHz versus 3.35 GHz. This indicates the architectural efficiency of Zen 2 outweighs the raw clock speed advantage of the Ice Lake part. The Core i5-1035G1's 4 cores and 8 threads are simply outclassed by the EPYC 7402P's 24 cores and 48 threads in every measurable way.

The average benchmark score comparison reinforces this. The Core i5-1035G1 averages 9684, while the EPYC 7402P averages 9529. This puts the Intel part 1.6% ahead on average across all benchmark suites. However, that aggregate figure is misleading — the EPYC 7402P's benchmark pool includes Geekbench results (10476 multicore, 1204 single-core) that the Intel part does not have, and the Intel chip has PassMark results that the EPYC lacks. When isolating the shared Cinebench tests, the EPYC 7402P wins every one with the same 83.7% margin.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows zero benchmark wins for the Intel Core i5-1035G1 in any shared test. The EPYC 7402P wins all six head-to-head comparisons. This is not a close contest by any metric.

However, the Core i5-1035G1 does hold its own in the broader benchmark landscape. It sits at the 65th percentile among all CPUs, the same percentile as the EPYC 7402P. Its average benchmark score of 9684 puts it slightly above the EPYC 7402P's 9529, and it ranks within 2.2% of the Intel Core 3 N350 (9903) and within 0.2% of the Intel Core i7-3770 (9706). The Core i5-1035G1 also beats the Intel Core i7-7700HQ (9493) by 2% in average score.

The EPYC 7402P, for its part, sits in the same percentile tier as the Intel Core i7-7700HQ (0.4% ahead), the Intel Atom x7835RE (1.1% ahead), and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8180 (1.3% ahead). Its average score of 9529 trails the Core i5-1035G1's 9684 by 1.6%.

For practical use, the EPYC 7402P is the clear choice for any compute-heavy workload. The Cinebench scores reflect sustained multi-threaded rendering performance that the Intel chip cannot approach. The Core i5-1035G1, despite losing every head-to-head test, remains competitive in its own weight class — it trades blows with desktop processors from earlier generations and offers a balanced set of PassMark results including 80534 in data compression and 26645 in integer math.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i5-1035G1 uses Ice Lake architecture with Sunny Cove-U cores, fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process with a die size of 123 mm². The AMD EPYC 7402P uses Zen 2 architecture with Rome codename, built on TSMC's 7 nm process with a die size of 74 mm² and 3,800 million transistors.

Core counts could not differ more. The Intel part offers 4 cores and 8 threads; the AMD part offers 24 cores and 48 threads. Cache hierarchies reflect this disparity. The Core i5-1035G1 has 80 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 6 MB shared L3. The EPYC 7402P has 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and a massive 128 MB shared L3.

Memory subsystems diverge sharply. The Intel chip uses dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support. The EPYC 7402P uses eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth and supports ECC memory. That fourfold bandwidth advantage and ECC capability make the EPYC 7402P suited for server-class workloads where memory integrity and throughput matter.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Intel part runs PCIe Gen 3, while the EPYC 7402P runs PCIe Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only). The EPYC 7402P includes no integrated graphics, whereas the Core i5-1035G1 ships with UHD Graphics. The Intel part fits the mobile BGA 1526 socket with a 15 W TDP; the EPYC 7402P uses the SP3 socket with a 180 W TDP. Clock speeds tell a nuanced story: the Intel chip has a 1.00 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost, while the EPYC 7402P has a 2.80 GHz base and 3.35 GHz boost. The Intel part boosts higher, but the AMD part runs a much faster base clock.

Release dates are nearly identical — July 31, 2019 for Intel and August 6, 2019 for AMD. Both remain active in production. The EPYC 7402P has a launch MSRP of $1280. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The data leaves no room for ambiguity. If your workload is rendering, simulation, or any multi-threaded compute task, the AMD EPYC 7402P is the only rational choice. It wins every Cinebench test by 83.7%, offers 6 times the core count, 21 times the L3 cache, and 4 times the memory bandwidth. The 128 MB shared L3 and eight-channel DDR4 support make it a server-grade processor in every sense.

The Intel Core i5-1035G1 is a different tool for a different job. Its 15 W TDP, integrated UHD Graphics, and mobile BGA 1526 socket position it for thin-and-light laptops where battery life and thermal limits dominate. The data shows it performs competitively against desktop chips from a previous generation — it matches the Intel Core i7-3770 within 0.2% and beats the Intel Core i7-7700HQ by 2% on average score. For a 15 W mobile part, that is respectable.

Who should pick which? Server and workstation builders should choose the EPYC 7402P without hesitation. The 24 cores, 48 threads, ECC memory support, and PCIe Gen 4 with 128 lanes deliver the throughput and reliability that enterprise workloads demand. Mobile users who need a capable processor with integrated graphics and low power draw should consider the Core i5-1035G1. The benchmark results show it holds its own against older desktop parts, and its 65th percentile ranking places it in the same tier as the EPYC 7402P.

The 83.7% margin across all tests is the headline figure. That consistency suggests a fundamental architectural gap, not a workload-specific advantage. The EPYC 7402P's Zen 2 cores are simply more efficient per clock, and with 6 times the cores, the multicore gap becomes insurmountable.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmark tests?

A: The AMD EPYC 7402P wins all 6 head-to-head benchmark tests against the Intel Core i5-1035G1. The Intel chip has zero wins in shared tests.

Q: How much faster is the EPYC 7402P in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The EPYC 7402P scores 37195 versus 6062 for the Core i5-1035G1, a delta of 83.7%. The same percentage gap applies to every shared Cinebench test.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The Intel Core i5-1035G1 averages 9684, while the AMD EPYC 7402P averages 9529. The Intel chip is 1.6% ahead on average, despite losing every head-to-head test.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD EPYC 7402P supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i5-1035G1 does not.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i5-1035G1 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The AMD EPYC 7402P has 24 cores and 48 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-1035G1 boosts to 3.60 GHz, which is higher than the EPYC 7402P's 3.35 GHz boost. However, the EPYC 7402P still wins every single-core benchmark by 83.7%.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-1035G1 | AMD EPYC 7402P |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 4 | 24 |

| Threads | 8 | 48 |

| Base Clock | 1000.00 MHz | 2.80 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.60 GHz | 3.35 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 180 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1526 | AMD Socket SP3 |

| Architecture | Ice Lake | Zen 2 |

| Codename | Ice Lake-U | Rome |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 7 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 74 mm² |

| Transistors | Not specified | 3,800 million |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 128 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Eight-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 204.8 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 3 | Gen 4, 128 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics | None |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Launch MSRP | Not specified | $1280 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | No |