CPU Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher core count?

A: The AMD EPYC 74F3 has 24 cores, while the Intel Core 5 211TE has 10 cores. The EPYC also doubles the thread count, offering 48 threads against the Intel’s 16.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE has an average benchmark score of 15370, while the AMD EPYC 74F3 scores 14915. This places the Intel ahead by roughly 3% in average score, despite losing every head-to-head Cinebench test.

Q: Which chip has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 5 211TE boosts to 4.80 GHz, while the AMD EPYC 74F3 reaches only 4.00 GHz. However, the EPYC’s base clock of 2.80 GHz is higher than Intel’s 1.70 GHz.

Q: Does the AMD EPYC 74F3 support more memory channels?

A: Yes. The EPYC 74F3 uses eight-channel memory with a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, while the Intel Core 5 211TE uses dual-channel memory with 76.8 GB/s. Both support ECC memory.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The AMD EPYC 74F3 is built on a 7 nm node by TSMC, while the Intel Core 5 211TE uses Intel’s 10 nm process. The EPYC also has a larger transistor count at 33,200 million.

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core Cinebench R23 score?

A: The AMD EPYC 74F3 scores 7279 in single-core Cinebench R23, far exceeding the Intel Core 5 211TE’s 1722. The EPYC leads by 76.3% in this test.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 5 211TE and AMD EPYC 74F3 are fundamentally different designs targeting different segments. The Intel chip is a desktop processor from the Bartlett Lake family, built on Intel’s 10 nm process. It packs 10 cores with 16 threads and a 20 MB shared L3 cache. Per-core L1 cache is 80 KB and L2 is 1.25 MB. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode, with a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. PCIe support is Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. Integrated UHD Graphics 730 is included, a feature absent on the AMD chip.

The AMD EPYC 74F3 is a server/workstation processor from the Milan family, using Zen 3 architecture. It is built on TSMC’s 7 nm node with 33,200 million transistors spread across four dies, each 81 mm². It has 24 cores and 48 threads, with a massive 256 MB shared L3 cache. Per-core L1 is 64 KB and L2 is 512 KB. Memory support is limited to DDR4 but uses eight channels, delivering 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. PCIe is Gen 4 with 128 CPU lanes. There is no integrated graphics. The EPYC’s TDP is 240 W, compared to 45 W for the Intel part, reflecting its server-grade power envelope.

The process node difference is notable: 7 nm (TSMC) vs 10 nm (Intel). The EPYC’s transistor count is substantially higher, though the Intel chip has a larger die at 215 mm² versus the EPYC’s 4x 81 mm² configuration. The EPYC’s cache hierarchy is far more generous, especially the 256 MB L3, which is 12.8 times the Intel’s 20 MB. Both processors have locked multipliers and active production status. The Intel chip launched in January 2025, while the EPYC came out in March 2021.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 74F3 wins all six head-to-head tests, with every delta at approximately -76%. The largest margin is in Cinebench R15 multicore, where the EPYC scores 5197 against Intel’s 1229, a 76.4% lead. In R15 single-core, the EPYC scores 733 against 173, also 76.4%. The pattern holds for R20: multicore 21657 vs 5124, single-core 3057 vs 723, both 76.3% deltas. In R23, the EPYC’s multicore score of 51566 dwarfs Intel’s 12201, and single-core is 7279 vs 1722, again 76.3%.

What is striking is that the Intel part, despite having a higher boost clock (4.80 GHz vs 4.00 GHz) and a newer release date (2025 vs 2021), cannot close the gap. The EPYC’s advantage is consistent across every Cinebench workload, whether single-threaded or multi-threaded. The 76.3-76.4% delta is nearly identical across all six tests, indicating a systemic performance advantage rather than workload-specific strengths. The Intel chip’s average benchmark score of 15370, however, is higher than the EPYC’s 14915, which is explained by the fact that the Intel part has additional PassMark tests (data compression, encryption, integer math, etc.) in its benchmark set, while the EPYC only has Cinebench scores in the head-to-head comparison.

Looking at nearest rivals, the Intel Core 5 211TE sits near the AMD EPYC 7543 (deltaPct -0.7%) and AMD Ryzen 3 7440U (deltaPct -2%). The AMD EPYC 74F3 is close to the Intel Core i7-9750H (deltaPct 0.2%) and Intel Core i3-1315U (deltaPct -0.7%). Both chips share a percentile rank of 69 among all CPUs, meaning they outperform roughly 69% of tested processors. This is a rare case where two chips with identical percentile rankings have vastly different performance profiles and target markets.

The Verdict

The data is categorical: for raw compute performance, the AMD EPYC 74F3 is the superior processor. It wins every head-to-head benchmark by approximately 76%, a margin that is consistent across single-core and multi-core workloads. The EPYC’s 24 cores and 48 threads, combined with a 256 MB L3 cache and 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth, make it a far more capable processor for demanding server and workstation tasks. The Intel Core 5 211TE, with 10 cores and 16 threads, is simply outmatched in every Cinebench test.

However, the verdict depends entirely on context. The Intel chip’s average benchmark score of 15370 is actually higher than the EPYC’s 14915, driven by its strong PassMark results in integer math (33991), floating-point math (26150), and multithread (11685). The Intel part also has a much lower TDP of 45 W versus 240 W, making it suitable for desktop environments where power and cooling are constrained. The EPYC, with its 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes and eight-channel memory, is built for server density, not desktop efficiency.

The release dates also matter: the Intel chip launched in January 2025, nearly four years after the EPYC’s March 2021 debut. Yet the older AMD part still dominates in Cinebench. This suggests that the EPYC 74F3 is a purpose-built high-core-count processor that remains competitive despite its age, while the Intel Core 5 211TE is a lower-power alternative with a different performance envelope. For users who need maximum compute throughput, the EPYC is the clear choice. For those prioritizing efficiency, integrated graphics, and a modern socket, the Intel part has its place, but it cannot match the EPYC’s raw power.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification. The AMD EPYC 74F3 has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the Intel Core 5 211TE has 10 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 2.80 GHz for AMD versus 1.70 GHz for Intel, but boost clocks favor Intel at 4.80 GHz versus 4.00 GHz. TDP is dramatically different: 240 W for the EPYC versus 45 W for the Intel. Sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket SP3 versus Intel Socket 1700.

Cache configurations are also starkly different. The EPYC has 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 256 MB shared L3. The Intel chip has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 20 MB shared L3. Memory support: the EPYC uses DDR4 only with eight channels and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth; the Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual channels and 76.8 GB/s. PCIe: the EPYC offers Gen 4 with 128 lanes, while Intel offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The EPYC has no integrated graphics; Intel includes UHD Graphics 730. Process nodes: 7 nm (TSMC) for AMD, 10 nm (Intel) for Intel. The EPYC has 33,200 million transistors across 4x 81 mm² dies; the Intel die is 215 mm². Launch MSRP: the EPYC was $2900, the Intel was $221. Release dates: March 2021 for AMD, January 2025 for Intel. Both support ECC memory and have locked multipliers.

Where Each One Wins

AMD EPYC 74F3 wins in:

Every Cinebench workload, with a consistent 76.3-76.4% lead over the Intel part. This includes single-core and multi-core tests in R15, R20, and R23. The EPYC’s 24-core and 48-thread configuration, paired with 256 MB L3 cache and 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth, makes it the obvious choice for multi-threaded rendering, scientific computation, database workloads, and any server application that scales with core count. Its 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes support massive I/O expansion, and its eight-channel memory architecture provides 2.67 times the memory bandwidth of the Intel chip. The EPYC also has a higher base clock (2.80 GHz vs 1.70 GHz), which helps in sustained all-core loads.

Intel Core 5 211TE wins in:

Average benchmark score (15370 vs 14915) due to its PassMark results, which are not part of the head-to-head Cinebench tests. The Intel chip achieves 33991 in integer math, 26150 in floating-point math, and 11685 in multithread, showcasing strong all-around performance for its power class. It has a higher boost clock (4.80 GHz) and a much lower TDP of 45 W, making it suitable for compact desktop builds, home servers, or any environment where power consumption and heat output are critical. The integrated UHD Graphics 730 removes the need for a discrete GPU in basic display tasks. Its support for both DDR4 and DDR5 provides flexibility in memory choice. The Intel part’s 2025 release date and $221 launch MSRP also position it as a more accessible, modern desktop option, though price is not a performance metric.

Context matters: The EPYC is a server processor with a $2900 launch MSRP, while the Intel is a $221 desktop chip. The data shows the EPYC dominates in raw compute, but the Intel holds its own in average score thanks to PassMark tests that measure different aspects of performance. For users with workloads that stress single-threaded responsiveness, the Intel’s higher boost clock may provide snappier performance in lightly threaded tasks, but the EPYC’s single-core Cinebench scores (7279 vs 1722) indicate it is still far ahead. The decision ultimately comes down to workload: the EPYC for heavy server compute, the Intel for efficient desktop use.