AMD EPYC 7452 vs Intel Core i7-4790K Comparison

Where Each One Wins

This is not a close contest. The AMD EPYC 7452 wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons recorded in the database, leaving the Intel Core i7-4790K without a single victory. The data is unambiguous: across every Cinebench iteration, from R15 through R23, the EPYC 7452 dominates in both single-core and multi-core workloads.

The Intel Core i7-4790K, a desktop part from the Haswell generation, was designed for a completely different purpose. Its benchmark profile shows a processor that excels in legacy single-threaded scenarios relative to its own era, but when placed against a 32-core Zen 2 server chip, the comparison becomes lopsided. The i7-4790K's best recorded single-core result is a Cinebench R23 score of 967, while the EPYC 7452 posts 5,505 in the same test. That is a monumental gap, and it exists in every single-core test, not just the multi-core ones where the EPYC's 32 cores would naturally dominate.

What is more surprising is the single-core deficit. The i7-4790K has a base clock of 4.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, while the EPYC 7452 sits at 2.20 GHz base and 3.35 GHz boost. Despite the Intel part's higher clocks, the EPYC 7452 still wins single-core Cinebench tests by margins of roughly 82%. This suggests that Zen 2's architectural efficiency, combined with the EPYC's larger cache hierarchy, more than compensates for the clock speed disadvantage. The i7-4790K's 8 MB of shared L3 cache looks meager next to the EPYC's 128 MB.

For use-case classification, the data splits cleanly along workload types. Multi-threaded rendering, simulation, and server-side processing belong to the EPYC 7452 without qualification. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 38,993 is more than five times the i7-4790K's 6,855. Even the i7-4790K's strongest area, its 4.40 GHz boost clock, does not translate into a single-core win. The EPYC 7452 takes every category measured.

The only nuance is that the i7-4790K has integrated graphics (Intel HD 4600) while the EPYC 7452 has none. That makes the Intel part viable for basic display output in a desktop build, but it is not a benchmark victory. The i7-4790K also supports DDR3 memory, whereas the EPYC 7452 uses DDR4 with eight-channel access. Neither of these differences appears in the head-to-head benchmark data, but they contextualize why the Intel part exists in the database at all.

The Verdict

Who should pick the Intel Core i7-4790K? Strictly from the recorded data, almost no one who needs modern performance. The i7-4790K is an end-of-life desktop processor with 4 cores and 8 threads. Its percentile rank against all CPUs in the database is 67, which is only one point higher than the EPYC 7452's 66. That near-identical percentile is misleading given the benchmark results, but it reflects the fact that the i7-4790K's average benchmark score of 11,745 is actually higher than the EPYC 7452's 11,279. This happens because the i7-4790K has more recorded benchmark entries (19 versus 6), and some of its PassMark scores, like the data compression result of 121,722, are strong enough to lift its average.

The EPYC 7452 is the clear choice for any workload that benefits from parallel execution. Its 32 cores and 64 threads are backed by 128 MB of shared L3 cache and eight-channel DDR4 memory bandwidth at 204.8 GB/s. The i7-4790K offers 25.6 GB/s of dual-channel DDR3 bandwidth. The EPYC 7452 wins every Cinebench test by approximately 82%, whether single-core or multi-core. That consistency is rare and decisive.

The i7-4790K has one legitimate niche: a legacy desktop system where the integrated GPU is needed and the motherboard socket (Intel Socket 1150) is already available. Its unlocked multiplier allows overclocking, which was a selling point in 2014. But the benchmark data does not support choosing it for raw performance against the EPYC 7452. There is no recorded test where the Intel part wins.

For server and workstation buyers, the EPYC 7452 is the only rational pick from this comparison. It is an active production processor with ECC memory support, PCIe Gen 4, and a 7 nm process from TSMC. The i7-4790K lacks ECC, uses PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, and is built on Intel's 22 nm node. Every technical advantage in the database belongs to the AMD part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data contains six tests, and the EPYC 7452 wins all of them. The deltas are remarkably uniform. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i7-4790K scores 690 while the EPYC 7452 scores 3,930, a delta of -82.4%. The single-core R15 test shows 97 versus 554, a delta of -82.5%. Moving to R20, the multi-core scores are 2,879 and 16,377 (-82.4%), and single-core is 406 versus 2,312 (-82.4%). R23 continues the pattern: 6,855 versus 38,993 in multi-core (-82.4%) and 967 versus 5,505 in single-core (-82.4%).

The consistency of the delta across every test is striking. It suggests that the EPYC 7452's advantage is not workload-specific but fundamental. The i7-4790K's 4.40 GHz boost clock cannot overcome the EPYC's architectural lead in instructions per clock, or its 16 times larger L3 cache. The EPYC 7452 also has roughly 2.7 times the transistors (3,800 million versus 1,400 million) despite a smaller die size (74 mm² versus 177 mm²), which points to the efficiency of TSMC's 7 nm process.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database adds context. The i7-4790K's closest competitor by average score is the Intel Core i7-1185G7 at 11,697 (0.4% difference), while the EPYC 7452's nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-1145G7 at 11,279 (0% difference). These are not direct comparisons, but they highlight that both processors sit in similar average-score territory despite their vastly different core counts. The i7-4790K's average is buoyed by PassMark tests where it performs relatively well, such as data compression (121,722) and integer math (29,163).

The largest single numerical gap in the head-to-head data is in Cinebench R23 multi-core: the EPYC 7452 exceeds the i7-4790K by 32,138 points. That is a difference of nearly five times. Even the smallest gap, Cinebench R15 single-core (97 versus 554), represents a 457-point margin, which is still a 4.7 times advantage for the EPYC.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-4790K win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The EPYC 7452 wins all six recorded head-to-head tests, covering Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core modes.

Q: Why does the EPYC 7452 win single-core tests despite having a lower boost clock?

A: The EPYC 7452 has a boost clock of 3.35 GHz versus the i7-4790K's 4.40 GHz, but it still wins every single-core Cinebench test by about 82%. The data suggests architectural efficiency and the 128 MB L3 cache compensate for the clock disadvantage.

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

A: The i7-4790K has an average benchmark score of 11,745, while the EPYC 7452 has an average of 11,279. The i7-4790K's average is higher because it has more recorded benchmark entries, including PassMark tests where it performs relatively well.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7452 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i7-4790K does not.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The i7-4790K has 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC 7452 has 128 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Is the EPYC 7452 still in production?

A: Yes, the EPYC 7452 is listed as active. The i7-4790K is end-of-life.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural eras. The Intel Core i7-4790K is based on the Haswell architecture, released in 2014, and manufactured on Intel's 22 nm process. The AMD EPYC 7452 uses the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Rome, and is built on TSMC's 7 nm process. This process difference is significant: the EPYC packs 3,800 million transistors into a 74 mm² die, while the i7-4790K fits 1,400 million transistors into 177 mm². The EPYC achieves nearly three times the transistor count in less than half the die area.

Cache hierarchies are also very different. The i7-4790K provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The EPYC 7452 offers 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 128 MB of shared L3. That L3 difference is a 16-fold increase, which directly impacts workloads that rely on large working sets.

Memory architecture diverges completely. The i7-4790K uses dual-channel DDR3 with 25.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The EPYC 7452 uses eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s, an eight-fold increase in memory bandwidth. ECC support is present only on the EPYC. PCIe capabilities also differ: the i7-4790K offers Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes, while the EPYC 7452 supports PCIe Gen 4.

The i7-4790K includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 4600), which the EPYC 7452 lacks entirely. This is expected given the EPYC's server targeting. The i7-4790K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking; the EPYC 7452 is locked. Core counts are vastly different: 4 cores and 8 threads for the Intel part versus 32 cores and 64 threads for the AMD part.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors:

• Cores: 4 (i7-4790K) versus 32 (EPYC 7452)
• Threads: 8 versus 64
• Base clock: 4.00 GHz versus 2.20 GHz
• Boost clock: 4.40 GHz versus 3.35 GHz
• TDP: 88 W versus 155 W
• Socket: Intel Socket 1150 versus AMD Socket SP3
• Process node: 22 nm versus 7 nm
• Foundry: Intel versus TSMC
• Transistors: 1,400 million versus 3,800 million
• Die size: 177 mm² versus 74 mm²
• L1 cache: 64 KB per core versus 96 KB per core
• L2 cache: 256 KB per core versus 512 KB per core
• L3 cache: 8 MB shared versus 128 MB shared
• Memory support: DDR3 versus DDR4
• Memory bus: Dual-channel versus Eight-channel
• Memory bandwidth: 25.6 GB/s versus 204.8 GB/s
• ECC memory: No versus Yes
• PCIe: Gen 3, 16 lanes versus Gen 4
• Integrated graphics: Intel HD 4600 versus None
• Market segment: Desktop versus Server/Workstation
• Production status: End-of-life versus Active
• Release date: 2014-04-30 versus 2019-08-06
• Multiplier unlocked: Yes versus No
• Part number: SR219 versus 100-000000057
• Generation: Core i7 (Haswell) versus EPYC (Zen 2 (Rome))