AMD EPYC 7452 vs Intel Core i3-1305U Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7452 and Intel Core i3-1305U occupy opposite ends of the computing spectrum, and the benchmark data reflects this divide with absolute clarity. The EPYC 7452 wins every single head-to-head benchmark in this comparison, with multi-core advantages exceeding 440% in Cinebench tests. However, the Core i3-1305U is not without merit, as its Passmark results in specific workloads and its mobile positioning suggest a different purpose entirely. The average benchmark scores are remarkably close — 11,279 for the EPYC against 11,200 for the i3 — but this figure is misleading, as it blends entirely different workload types. The data ultimately shows two processors designed for different worlds: one for massive parallel throughput in servers, the other for efficient mobile computing.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7452 dominates in every Cinebench benchmark, which measures sustained multi-threaded rendering workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 38,993 versus the Intel’s 7,183 represents a 442.9% advantage. This pattern holds across all Cinebench versions: R15 multi-core shows 3,930 against 723 (443.6% delta), R20 multi-core shows 16,377 against 3,016 (443% delta), and even single-core tests show the EPYC ahead by roughly 443% in every case. The EPYC’s 32 cores and 64 threads provide the raw parallel processing power that rendering and server workloads demand.

The Intel Core i3-1305U wins in areas not covered by the head-to-head Cinebench tests. Its Passmark results show particular strengths in data compression (92,767), integer math (27,925), and floating-point math (19,687). The i3 also demonstrates respectable single-thread performance with a Passmark single-thread score of 3,115. These Passmark figures are not directly compared against the EPYC in this dataset, but they indicate the i3’s capability in everyday computing tasks. The i3’s integrated UHD Graphics 64EU provides a feature the EPYC entirely lacks, making it suitable for systems requiring display output without a discrete GPU.

The EPYC’s wins are absolute and overwhelming in rendering workloads. The i3’s wins are implicit through its Passmark sub-scores, which show balanced performance across varied tasks. The EPYC’s 66th percentile ranking among all CPUs matches the i3’s 66th percentile, but this equivalence masks the fundamental difference in their target applications.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: anyone needing multi-core rendering performance must choose the AMD EPYC 7452. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 38,993 is over five times higher than the i3’s 7,183. The EPYC’s 32 cores, 64 threads, and 128 MB of shared L3 cache make it the only viable option for server workloads, virtualization, or heavy content creation. The benchmark results show a 443% advantage across every Cinebench test, which is not a marginal difference but a categorical one.

The Intel Core i3-1305U serves a completely different purpose. Its 15W TDP, integrated graphics, and mobile BGA 1744 socket indicate it belongs in thin-and-light laptops where battery life and portability matter more than raw compute. The i3’s Passmark data compression score of 92,767 shows it handles everyday file operations and general productivity tasks competently. For users who need a balanced mobile processor with modern features like DDR5 memory support and integrated graphics, the i3 is the logical choice. Its launch MSRP is $309, which reflects its mainstream positioning.

There is no genuine competition between these two processors. The EPYC 7452 is a server/workstation part with a 155W TDP and eight-channel DDR4 memory support. The i3 is a 15W mobile part with dual-channel memory. Choosing between them is not about performance preference but about platform requirements. If the workload is server-side rendering or multi-threaded computation, the EPYC wins by every measure. If the need is a mobile device with integrated graphics and acceptable general performance, the i3 is the only option that fits that form factor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The six head-to-head benchmarks all follow the same pattern: the AMD EPYC 7452 wins by a margin of approximately 443%. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC scores 3,930 against the i3’s 723, a 443.6% delta. The single-core R15 test shows 554 against 102, a 443.1% delta. These margins are remarkably consistent across all tests, suggesting the difference is structural rather than workload-specific.

Cinebench R20 multi-core shows the EPYC at 16,377 versus the i3’s 3,016, a 443% delta. The R20 single-core test shows 2,312 against 425, a 444% delta. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 38,993 against 7,183, a 442.9% delta, and R23 single-core shows 5,505 against 1,014, also a 442.9% delta. The consistency of these deltas — all falling between 442.9% and 444% — indicates that the EPYC’s advantage scales uniformly across both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering workloads.

The EPYC’s 32 cores versus the i3’s 5 cores explains the multi-core dominance. However, the single-core advantage is more surprising. The EPYC’s 2.20 GHz base clock and 3.35 GHz boost clock are lower than the i3’s 1.60 GHz base and 4.50 GHz boost, yet the EPYC still wins single-core Cinebench by over 440%. This indicates the Zen 2 architecture's efficiency at these specific workloads, despite the lower clock speeds. The i3’s higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz does not translate into Cinebench single-core wins, which is a notable finding for this comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better multi-core performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 7452 is overwhelmingly superior, scoring 38,993 in Cinebench R23 multi-core compared to the Intel Core i3-1305U’s 7,183, a 442.9% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel Core i3-1305U win any head-to-head benchmarks?

A: No. The head-to-head dataset shows the AMD EPYC 7452 winning all 6 benchmarks, with the Intel scoring 0 wins across the Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i3-1305U includes integrated graphics, specifically UHD Graphics 64EU. The AMD EPYC 7452 has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU for display output.

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

A: The AMD EPYC 7452 has 32 cores and 64 threads. The Intel Core i3-1305U has 5 cores and 6 threads.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD EPYC 7452 has an average benchmark score of 11,279, while the Intel Core i3-1305U scores 11,200. This represents a 0.7% difference in favor of the EPYC, despite the massive Cinebench deltas.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7452 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i3-1305U does not. This makes the EPYC suitable for error-critical server applications.

Architecture Differences

The AMD EPYC 7452 uses the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Rome, built on a 7 nm process by TSMC. It contains 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. The Intel Core i3-1305U uses the Raptor Lake architecture, codenamed Raptor Lake-U, built on Intel’s 10 nm process. The i3’s transistor count and die size are not listed in the data.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The EPYC 7452 has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 128 MB of shared L3 cache. The i3-1305U has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 10 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC’s 128 MB L3 cache is 12.8 times larger than the i3’s 10 MB, which contributes to its server-grade performance in large datasets.

Memory support also differs fundamentally. The EPYC supports DDR4 memory over an eight-channel bus with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. The i3 supports both DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, but its memory bandwidth is not listed. The EPYC supports ECC memory, while the i3 does not. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3, while the i3 uses Intel BGA 1744, making them physically incompatible.

The EPYC’s PCIe Gen 4 support is present on both, but the i3 specifies only 8 lanes (CPU only). The EPYC’s PCIe lane count is not specified in the data. The integrated graphics situation is a major architectural difference: the i3 includes UHD Graphics 64EU, while the EPYC has none.

Specification Differences

The AMD EPYC 7452 and Intel Core i3-1305U differ in nearly every specification field. The EPYC has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the i3 has 5 cores and 6 threads. Base clocks are 2.20 GHz for the EPYC and 1.60 GHz for the i3, though the i3’s boost clock of 4.50 GHz exceeds the EPYC’s 3.35 GHz.

Thermal design power shows the starkest contrast: the EPYC has a 155W TDP, while the i3 has a 15W TDP. This 140W difference reflects their target platforms — the EPYC requires active server cooling, while the i3 is designed for fanless or low-power mobile systems. The sockets differ completely: AMD Socket SP3 for the EPYC versus Intel BGA 1744 for the i3.

The EPYC supports DDR4 memory exclusively, while the i3 supports both DDR4 and DDR5. Memory channels differ from eight on the EPYC to dual-channel on the i3. The EPYC’s memory bandwidth is specified at 204.8 GB/s, while the i3’s is not listed. ECC memory is supported only on the EPYC.

The process nodes differ: 7 nm for the AMD (TSMC foundry) versus 10 nm for the Intel. Release dates are separated by over three years, with the EPYC launching on 2019-08-06 and the i3 launching on 2023-01-03. The i3 has a launch MSRP of $309, while the EPYC has no listed MSRP. The EPYC’s part number is 100-000000057, while the i3’s is SRMLT. Both have locked multipliers, and neither has a 3D V-Cache variant listed.