CPU Comparison

The data presents a decisive matchup: the AMD EPYC 7443 wins every single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, often by margins exceeding 80%. The Intel Core 3 N355, a low-power mobile processor, is outclassed in every measurable way by the server-grade EPYC part. Benchmark results indicate this is not a contest of near-equals but a demonstration of two processors designed for entirely different purposes and performance strata.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD EPYC 7443 dominates the Cinebench suite with overwhelming force. In the multi-core tests, the margin is staggering: the EPYC 7443 scores 48,183 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 89.1% ahead of the Core 3 N355's 5,262. The pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the EPYC's 20,236 score represents an 82.2% advantage over Intel's 3,612. Even in the older R15 multi-core test, the EPYC 7443's 4,856 is 83.1% ahead of the N355's 822. These results show that in heavily threaded workloads, the EPYC 7443 is in a different league entirely, leveraging its 24 cores and 48 threads to produce roughly six to nine times the output of the 8-thread N355.

The single-core results are equally lopsided, though the percentage gaps are slightly smaller. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC 7443 scores 6,802 versus the N355's 1,039, a difference of 84.7%. The R20 single-core test shows the EPYC at 2,856 against 509, a 82.2% lead. The R15 single-core result is 685 versus 168, a 75.5% margin. These figures indicate that the EPYC 7443's Zen 3 architecture provides a substantial per-thread performance advantage, not just a massive core-count advantage. Even a single thread from the EPYC 7443 is roughly four times faster than a single thread from the Core 3 N355.

The head-to-head tally is a clean sweep: the AMD EPYC 7443 wins 6 out of 6 benchmarks, with the Intel Core 3 N355 recording zero wins. The average delta across all tests is approximately -82.8%, meaning the EPYC is consistently about five to six times faster. There is no benchmark where the Intel part demonstrates any competitive strength. The closest the N355 gets is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the deficit is "only" 75.5%, but this is still a dominant victory for the EPYC.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures with distinct design goals. The Intel Core 3 N355 uses the Twin Lake architecture, a 10nm process from Intel's own foundry. It is a mobile-focused chip with 8 cores and 8 threads, operating at a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. Its cache hierarchy is modest: 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The N355 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 memory over a single-channel bus, yielding 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. It also includes integrated UHD Graphics 770 and uses PCIe Gen 3 with 9 CPU-only lanes.

The AMD EPYC 7443 is a server/workstation part from the EPYC 7003 series, built on the Zen 3 architecture (codename Milan) using a 7nm process from TSMC. It packs 24 cores and 48 threads, with a base clock of 2.85 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz. The cache is substantially larger: 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 128 MB of shared L3. The EPYC uses an eight-channel DDR4 memory bus, delivering 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth, over five times the N355's throughput. It also supports ECC memory, a critical feature for server reliability that the N355 lacks. The EPYC provides PCIe Gen 4 with 128 CPU-only lanes, a 14x increase in lane count over the Intel part.

The transistor counts and die sizes tell a story of scale. The EPYC 7443 contains 16,600 million transistors across a 4x 81 mm² die configuration, whereas the N355's transistor count and die size are not specified in the data. The EPYC's TDP is 200W, compared to the N355's 15W, reflecting the enormous difference in power envelope and thermal requirements. The N355 is an active mobile part released in early 2025, while the EPYC 7443 is an active server part released in early 2021. These are not just different chips; they are different classes of silicon optimized for opposite ends of the computing spectrum.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD EPYC 7443 in multi-core workloads?

A: The EPYC 7443 is 89.1% faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core (48,183 vs 5,262) and 82.2% faster in Cinebench R20 multi-core (20,236 vs 3,612). In R15 multi-core, it leads by 83.1% (4,856 vs 822).

Q: Does the Intel Core 3 N355 win any benchmark against the EPYC 7443?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the EPYC 7443 winning all 6 benchmarks, with the N355 recording zero wins. The smallest deficit for the N355 is 75.5% in Cinebench R15 single-core.

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

A: The EPYC 7443 has an eight-channel memory bus providing 204.8 GB/s, while the N355 has a single-channel bus providing 38.4 GB/s. The EPYC's bandwidth is roughly 5.3 times higher.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD EPYC 7443 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core 3 N355 does not. This makes the EPYC suitable for error-sensitive server workloads.

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

A: The Intel Core 3 N355 has 8 cores and 8 threads. The AMD EPYC 7443 has 24 cores and 48 threads, three times the cores and six times the threads.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The EPYC 7443 has 128 MB of shared L3 cache, versus 6 MB of shared L3 on the N355. The EPYC also has per-core L2 cache of 512 KB, compared to 2 MB shared L2 on the N355.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the Intel Core 3 N355 and the AMD EPYC 7443:

• Cores: 8 vs 24
• Threads: 8 vs 48
• Base Clock: 1.90 GHz vs 2.85 GHz
• Boost Clock: 3.90 GHz vs 4.00 GHz
• TDP: 15W vs 200W
• Socket: Intel BGA 1264 vs AMD Socket SP3
• Architecture: Twin Lake vs Zen 3
• Process Node: 10 nm vs 7 nm
• Foundry: Intel vs TSMC
• Transistors: Not specified vs 16,600 million
• Die Size: Not specified vs 4x 81 mm²
• L1 Cache: 96 KB per core vs 64 KB per core
• L2 Cache: 2 MB shared vs 512 KB per core
• L3 Cache: 6 MB shared vs 128 MB shared
• Memory Support: DDR4, DDR5, LPDDR5 vs DDR4
• Memory Bus: Single-channel vs Eight-channel
• Memory Bandwidth: 38.4 GB/s vs 204.8 GB/s
• ECC Memory: False vs True
• PCIe: Gen 3, 9 Lanes vs Gen 4, 128 Lanes
• Integrated Graphics: UHD Graphics 770 vs None
• Market Segment: Mobile vs Server/Workstation
• Release Date: 2025-01-06 vs 2021-03-14
• Launch MSRP: Not specified vs $2010
• Part Number: SRPNT vs 100-000000340100-100000340WOF

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 7443 is the superior processor for any performance-critical task. It wins every single benchmark by a margin of at least 75.5%, with multi-core leads exceeding 89% in the most demanding Cinebench R23 test. The EPYC's 24 cores, 48 threads, 128 MB of L3 cache, and eight-channel memory system provide an overwhelming advantage in both parallel throughput and raw single-thread speed. Its 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth is over five times that of the N355, and its PCIe Gen 4 with 128 lanes offers vastly greater I/O expansion capability. The EPYC 7443 also supports ECC memory, making it suitable for data integrity-critical server deployments.

The Intel Core 3 N355's only advantages are in power efficiency and integration. With a 15W TDP versus the EPYC's 200W, the N355 is designed for fanless or low-power mobile devices. It includes integrated UHD Graphics 770, eliminating the need for a discrete GPU in basic systems. Its single-channel memory and 9 PCIe Gen 3 lanes are sufficient for lightweight tasks but are not in the same class as the EPYC's server-grade I/O. The N355's release date in 2025 is newer, but this does not compensate for the massive performance deficit.

For a database or compute server, the choice is clear: the EPYC 7443 is the only viable option. For an ultra-portable laptop or embedded device where power consumption is paramount, the N355 is the appropriate part. There is no scenario where the N355 outperforms the EPYC 7443 in the benchmark data.

Where Each One Wins

AMD EPYC 7443 wins in:

• All multi-threaded rendering workloads (Cinebench R15, R20, R23 multi-core) with leads between 82.2% and 89.1%.
• All single-threaded workloads (Cinebench R15, R20, R23 single-core) with leads between 75.5% and 84.7%.
• Memory bandwidth-intensive applications, given its 204.8 GB/s eight-channel bus versus 38.4 GB/s single-channel.
• Server workloads requiring ECC memory, 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, and massive 128 MB L3 cache for data residency.
• High-core-count virtualization or database workloads, leveraging 48 threads.

Intel Core 3 N355 wins in:

• Power-constrained environments, with a 15W TDP compared to 200W.
• Fanless or passively-cooled mobile devices due to low thermal output.
• Systems requiring integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 770) without a discrete GPU.
• Compact BGA 1264 socket designs, versus the large SP3 server socket.
• Applications that need DDR5 or LPDDR5 memory support, which the EPYC lacks.