AMD EPYC 7452 vs Intel Core i5-1145G7 Comparison

Intel Core i5-1145G7 and AMD EPYC 7452 occupy opposite ends of the computing spectrum, yet their average benchmark scores are identical at 11279, placing both at the 66th percentile among all CPUs. This parity in aggregate scoring, however, masks a fundamental divergence in workload suitability. The Intel part is a 4-core mobile processor designed for responsiveness, while the AMD EPYC is a 32-core server behemoth built for throughput. The head-to-head data shows a clean sweep: the EPYC 7452 wins all six Cinebench comparisons, with a consistent deltaPct of -80.1% against the i5-1145G7 in every test. This means the Intel chip scores roughly 80% lower in each instance, a gap that defines their distinct roles.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7452 is the unambiguous winner in every multi-threaded and single-threaded Cinebench test recorded. Its dominance is absolute in the head-to-head data, winning all six benchmarks. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the EPYC scores 38993 versus the Intel’s 7777, a difference of 31216 points. This scale of advantage is typical of a 32-core, 64-thread server processor against a 4-core, 8-thread mobile chip. The EPYC’s wins extend to single-core tests as well, where the Zen 2 architecture’s efficiency at a 2.20 GHz base clock still outpaces the Tiger Lake part’s higher 4.40 GHz boost clock in these specific workloads.

The Intel Core i5-1145G7’s strengths do not appear in the head-to-head Cinebench results, but its benchmark suite reveals where it holds its own. In PassMark tests, the i5-1145G7 records a data compression score of 103172, which is its highest single benchmark result. It also shows competitive integer math performance at 32087 and floating point math at 19233. The mobile chip’s integrated Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU provides a graphics capability that the EPYC 7452 lacks entirely, giving the Intel part a clear edge for systems requiring visual output without a discrete GPU. For workloads that fit within its 8 MB of shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory bus, the i5-1145G7 delivers serviceable performance, but it cannot match the EPYC’s raw compute density.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i5-1145G7 uses the Tiger Lake-U architecture on a 10 nm process node from Intel’s own foundry, with a die size of 144 mm². It features 4 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, all within a 28 W TDP. Its cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is limited to DDR4 and LPDDR4X in a dual-channel configuration, with no ECC capability. The PCIe interface is Gen 4 with only 4 lanes from the CPU, reflecting its mobile focus.

In contrast, the AMD EPYC 7452 is a 32-core, 64-thread server processor built on the Zen 2 (Rome) architecture. It uses TSMC’s 7 nm process node, with a die size of just 74 mm² and 3,800 million transistors. The base clock is 2.20 GHz with a boost clock of 3.35 GHz, operating at a 155 W TDP. Its cache configuration is dramatically larger: 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 128 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC supports DDR4 memory across an eight-channel bus with a peak bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s and full ECC support. It offers Gen 4 PCIe without the lane limitation of the Intel part. The EPYC also has no integrated graphics, a clear trade-off for its server role. The process node difference is stark: 10 nm versus 7 nm, with the smaller node contributing to the EPYC’s higher core count at a smaller die size.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results show a uniform pattern of EPYC dominance. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the EPYC 7452 scores 3930 against the i5-1145G7’s 783, a delta of -80.1% for the Intel part. The R15 single-core test shows the same delta: EPYC at 554, Intel at 110. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multicore scores are 16377 for the EPYC and 3266 for the Intel, again -80.1%. The R20 single-core results follow suit at 2312 versus 461. In Cinebench R23, the most demanding test, the EPYC’s multicore score of 38993 dwarfs the Intel’s 7777, while single-core shows 5505 against 1098. Every single comparison yields the identical deltaPct of -80.1%, indicating a consistent relative performance gap across all Cinebench versions.

This consistency is notable. The Intel i5-1145G7’s boost clock of 4.40 GHz does not translate into a single-core victory, as the EPYC’s 3.35 GHz boost still produces a 401% higher score in R23 single-core (5505 versus 1098). The EPYC’s advantage is not merely about core count; its per-core efficiency in these tests is superior. For multicore workloads, the 8x core count advantage (32 versus 4) combines with higher per-core throughput to produce the observed 5x score difference in R23 (38993 divided by 7777 equals approximately 5.01). The data suggests that for any Cinebench-based rendering or simulation task, the EPYC 7452 is overwhelmingly preferred.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: Both the Intel Core i5-1145G7 and the AMD EPYC 7452 have identical average benchmark scores of 11279, placing them at the same 66th percentile among all CPUs.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The AMD EPYC 7452 scores 38993 in Cinebench R23 multicore, while the Intel Core i5-1145G7 scores 7777. This represents a deltaPct of -80.1% for the Intel part, meaning the EPYC is roughly five times faster.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-1145G7 win any single-threaded Cinebench tests?

A: No. The AMD EPYC 7452 wins every single-threaded Cinebench test. In R23 single-core, the EPYC scores 5505 versus the Intel’s 1098, a -80.1% delta.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth specifications for each CPU?

A: The AMD EPYC 7452 has a memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s via an eight-channel DDR4 bus. The Intel Core i5-1145G7 uses a dual-channel DDR4/LPDDR4X bus, but no specific bandwidth figure is listed in the data.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7452 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i5-1145G7 does not have ECC capability.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Intel Core i5-1145G7 has a TDP of 28 W, whereas the AMD EPYC 7452 has a TDP of 155 W. This reflects the EPYC’s server-class power envelope.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 7452 is the superior processor for any compute-intensive workload. It wins all six head-to-head Cinebench benchmarks, with a consistent 80.1% score advantage over the Intel Core i5-1145G7 in both single-core and multicore tests. Its 32 cores and 64 threads, combined with 128 MB of shared L3 cache and 204.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth, make it the only choice for server, workstation, or rendering tasks where throughput is paramount. The EPYC’s ECC memory support and eight-channel memory bus further cement its position for reliability and high-bandwidth applications.

The Intel Core i5-1145G7 serves a completely different purpose. Its 28 W TDP and integrated Iris Xe Graphics make it suitable for mobile systems where power efficiency and graphics output are required. It does not compete with the EPYC on raw performance, but it offers a distinct feature set: the only processor here with integrated graphics, a compact 144 mm² die, and support for LPDDR4X memory. For a laptop or compact device prioritizing portability over compute, the i5-1145G7 is the appropriate pick. However, for any benchmark in the data — all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests — the EPYC 7452 is the definitive winner. The choice hinges entirely on whether the workload demands server-grade throughput or mobile efficiency; there is no middle ground in these results.