CPU Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7452 and Intel Core i7-6700 occupy entirely different corners of the processor market, and the benchmark data reflects that divide with unusual clarity. The EPYC 7452 is a 32-core server processor from the EPYC 7002 series, built on the Zen 2 architecture, while the Core i7-6700 is a 4-core desktop part from the Skylake generation. Across the six head-to-head Cinebench tests available, the EPYC 7452 wins all six, with deltas ranging from 471.1% to 477.1%. The average benchmark score for the EPYC 7452 is 11279, placing it next to the Intel Core i5-1145G7, while the Core i7-6700 averages 11074, sitting near the AMD EPYC 9224. Both chips share the 66th percentile among all CPUs, but that parity in rank masks a massive gulf in raw multi-threaded throughput.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result comes from Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the EPYC 7452 scores 38993 against the Core i7-6700's 6828. That is a 471.1% advantage, meaning the EPYC delivers roughly 5.7 times the multi-threaded performance of the Intel part. The gap is nearly identical in Cinebench R20 multi-core, with the EPYC scoring 16377 versus 2867, again a 471.2% delta. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows the same pattern: 3930 for the EPYC versus 688 for the Core i7, a 471.2% lead.

Single-core results are less lopsided in absolute terms but still heavily favor the EPYC 7452. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC scores 5505 against 964 for the Core i7-6700, a 471.1% delta. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 2312 versus 404, a 472.3% difference, and Cinebench R15 single-core shows 554 versus 96, a 477.1% gap. The consistency of these deltas, all hovering near 471-477%, suggests the performance difference is structural rather than workload-specific. The Core i7-6700 does have a higher base clock (3.40 GHz versus 2.20 GHz) and boost clock (4.00 GHz versus 3.35 GHz), but the EPYC's architectural advantages overwhelm that frequency deficit.

The data shows no scenario where the Core i7-6700 wins. The winsA count is 6, and winsB is 0. Even in single-threaded tests, which typically favor higher-clocked desktop parts, the EPYC 7452 maintains a roughly 4.7x lead. This is not a close contest by any metric in the benchmark set.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 7452 wins in every category measured by the Cinebench suite. Multi-core workloads are its natural domain, given 32 cores and 64 threads versus 4 cores and 8 threads. The 38993 R23 multi-core score indicates it can handle heavily parallelized rendering, scientific computation, or server-side virtualization with substantial headroom. Single-core performance also favors the EPYC, which is notable because the Core i7-6700's 4.00 GHz boost clock is the highest frequency in this comparison. The EPYC's 5505 single-core R23 score suggests its Zen 2 microarchitecture delivers more instructions per clock than Skylake, despite the lower clock speed.

The Core i7-6700 has no benchmark wins in this dataset, but its profile suggests where it could theoretically fit: low-power, low-thread-count scenarios. Its 65W TDP is less than half the EPYC's 155W, and its dual-channel memory bus with 34.1 GB/s bandwidth is suited for basic desktop tasks. The EPYC's eight-channel memory bus at 204.8 GB/s is six times wider, but that bandwidth is only useful with many concurrent memory accesses. The Core i7-6700 also includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 530), which the EPYC lacks entirely, so a system with the Intel part could run without a discrete GPU. However, in the benchmark data provided, the Core i7-6700 does not win a single test.

The EPYC 7452's average benchmark score of 11279 places it 0.3% below the AMD EPYC 7402 (11312) and 0.5% below the AMD EPYC 73F3 (11334), while sitting 0.7% above the Intel Core i3-1305U (11200). The Core i7-6700's 11074 average is 0.4% below the AMD EPYC 9224 (11118), 0.7% below the AMD EPYC 7542 (11152), 0.9% below the AMD Ryzen 5 3500U (11176), and 1% below the Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y (11191). Both chips are surrounded by a mix of server and mobile parts, reinforcing that their benchmark averages are not directly comparable to their core counts.

Architecture Differences

The EPYC 7452 uses the Zen 2 architecture on a 7 nm process from TSMC, with a codename of Rome. It integrates 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. The Core i7-6700 uses Skylake on Intel's 14 nm process, with no transistor or die size data provided. The process node difference is significant: 7 nm versus 14 nm allows the EPYC to pack 32 cores into a power envelope that is higher but still manageable for a server part.

Cache configurations diverge sharply. The EPYC 7452 has 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 128 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core i7-6700 has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The EPYC's 128 MB L3 is 16 times larger, which helps with large working sets in server workloads. The Core i7's smaller cache reflects its desktop origins.

Memory support differs in scope. The EPYC 7452 supports DDR4 over an eight-channel bus with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth and includes ECC memory support. The Core i7-6700 supports both DDR3 and DDR4 over a dual-channel bus with 34.1 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support. PCIe generations also differ: the EPYC offers Gen 4, while the Core i7 offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The EPYC has no integrated graphics; the Core i7 includes HD Graphics 530. The EPYC targets the server/workstation segment, while the Core i7 is a desktop part. Production status shows the EPYC as Active and the Core i7 as End-of-life.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7452 has 32 cores and 64 threads. The Intel Core i7-6700 has 4 cores and 8 threads. This is an 8x difference in core count and an 8x difference in thread count.

Q: How much faster is the EPYC 7452 in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The EPYC 7452 scores 38993, while the Core i7-6700 scores 6828. The delta is 471.1%, meaning the EPYC is approximately 5.7 times faster in this test.

Q: Does the Core i7-6700 win any single-threaded test?

A: No. The EPYC 7452 wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, including all three single-core tests (R15, R20, R23). The closest single-core margin is in R23, where the EPYC leads 5505 to 964, a 471.1% delta.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The EPYC 7452 has an eight-channel memory bus with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Core i7-6700 has a dual-channel bus with 34.1 GB/s. That is a 6x difference in memory bandwidth.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7452 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i7-6700 does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are the process nodes for each chip?

A: The EPYC 7452 is built on a 7 nm process by TSMC. The Core i7-6700 is built on a 14 nm process by Intel. The EPYC also has a smaller die size at 74 mm², while the Core i7's die size is not listed.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 7452 | Intel Core i7-6700 |

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

| Cores | 32 | 4 |

| Threads | 64 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 2.20 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.35 GHz | 4.00 GHz |

| TDP | 155 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | Intel Socket 1151 |

| Architecture | Zen 2 | Skylake |

| Codename | Rome | Skylake |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 3,800 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 74 mm² | Not listed |

| L1 Cache | 96 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

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

| L3 Cache | 128 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR3, DDR4 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | 34.1 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4 | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | None | HD Graphics 530 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2019-08-06 | 2015-06-30 |

| Part Number | 100-000000057 | SR2L2 |

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion: the AMD EPYC 7452 is the overwhelmingly faster processor in every benchmark test recorded. Its 6-0 win record, with deltas never below 471.1%, leaves no ambiguity. Anyone running multi-threaded workloads, rendering, data processing, virtualization, should choose the EPYC 7452 based on its 38993 R23 multi-core score and 128 MB L3 cache. Its 32 cores and 64 threads provide a level of parallel throughput that the Core i7-6700 cannot approach, and its eight-channel memory bus at 204.8 GB/s supports that core count without bottlenecking.

The Intel Core i7-6700 is not competitive in this comparison, and its end-of-life production status further reduces its appeal. Its only advantages are a lower 65W TDP, a higher base clock (3.40 GHz) and boost clock (4.00 GHz), and integrated graphics. The EPYC 7452 lacks integrated graphics, so a system with that chip requires a discrete GPU. But for pure processing performance, the Core i7-6700 loses every test. Its 4 cores and 8 threads produce a best-case R23 multi-core score of 6828, which is less than one-fifth of the EPYC's result. The Core i7-6700's single-core scores are also lower despite the clock advantage, indicating the EPYC's Zen 2 architecture is more efficient per cycle.

Given the benchmark data, the EPYC 7452 is the clear choice for any workload where CPU performance matters. The Core i7-6700 might fit a scenario requiring minimal power draw and no discrete GPU, but no benchmark in this dataset supports that choice from a performance standpoint. The EPYC 7452's 66th percentile ranking, shared with the Core i7-6700, reflects that average scores are skewed by the wide range of CPUs in the database; the head-to-head results tell the real story. The EPYC 7452 is a server-class part delivering server-class numbers, and the Core i7-6700 is a legacy desktop chip that the data shows as categorically outmatched.