AMD EPYC 74F3 vs Intel Core i5-11400H Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD EPYC 74F3 is the clear performance winner in every recorded head-to-head benchmark, dominating the Intel Core i5-11400H across all Cinebench workloads. The EPYC 74F3 wins all six direct comparisons, with the Intel part trailing by roughly 75% in every test. For workloads that scale with core count and sustained throughput, the EPYC 74F3 is the only rational choice based on the data.

The Intel Core i5-11400H, however, occupies a completely different market segment. It is a mobile processor with a 35 W TDP, designed for laptops where power envelopes are tight. The data shows it sits at the 69th percentile among all CPUs, same as the EPYC 74F3, which means both parts are near the middle of the overall performance distribution. But the i5-11400H achieves this with dramatically fewer resources: 6 cores versus 24, and a much smaller cache hierarchy.

The verdict depends entirely on the use case. For a server or workstation environment where multi-threaded throughput is paramount, the EPYC 74F3 is the obvious pick. For a mobile platform where the processor must fit into a laptop chassis and operate within a 35 W thermal envelope, the i5-11400H is the only viable option between these two. The data cannot recommend the EPYC 74F3 for mobile use, nor the i5-11400H for serious multi-core server workloads. The i5-11400H does offer integrated graphics, which the EPYC 74F3 lacks entirely, making the Intel part more self-contained for systems without a discrete GPU.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies and manufacturing approaches. The Intel Core i5-11400H uses the Tiger Lake architecture, specifically Tiger Lake-H, built on Intel's 10 nm process node. It is a monolithic design with a die size of 190 mm². The AMD EPYC 74F3 uses the Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Milan, fabricated by TSMC on a 7 nm node. AMD's chip is built from four separate dies, each measuring 81 mm², totaling 33,200 million transistors. Intel does not list a transistor count in the database.

The core configurations differ wildly. The i5-11400H has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the EPYC 74F3 packs 24 cores and 48 threads. Cache hierarchies also diverge sharply. Intel allocates 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. AMD provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 256 MB of shared L3 cache. This 256 MB L3 is more than 20 times larger than Intel's 12 MB pool, which matters for workloads with large working sets that can reside in cache.

Memory architecture is another major split. The i5-11400H supports dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The EPYC 74F3 supports eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth, exactly four times the Intel part's memory throughput. The EPYC 74F3 also supports ECC memory, while the i5-11400H does not. PCIe connectivity favors AMD heavily: the EPYC 74F3 provides 128 Gen 4 lanes from the CPU, while the i5-11400H provides only 20 Gen 4 lanes. The Intel part includes UHD Graphics integrated, whereas the EPYC 74F3 has no integrated graphics at all.

The socket and platform targets are entirely different: the i5-11400H uses Intel BGA 1787 for mobile, while the EPYC 74F3 uses AMD Socket SP3 for servers and workstations. The i5-11400H was released on May 10, 2021, while the EPYC 74F3 came earlier on March 14, 2021. Both parts remain in active production. The Intel part carries a launch MSRP of $250, and the AMD part carries a launch MSRP of $2900.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison contains six Cinebench tests, and the AMD EPYC 74F3 wins all of them by nearly identical margins. The closest race is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the EPYC 74F3 scores 733 against the i5-11400H's 182, a delta of -75.2% for the Intel part. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 74F3 scores 5197 versus 1296, a delta of -75.1%. These are not close contests; the EPYC 74F3 is roughly four times faster in every single metric.

Cinebench R20 tells the same story. The EPYC 74F3 scores 21657 in multi-core versus 5400 for the i5-11400H, a -75.1% delta. In single-core, the EPYC 74F3 scores 3057 versus 762, also -75.1%. Cinebench R23 continues the pattern: multi-core shows 51566 for AMD versus 12859 for Intel, and single-core shows 7279 versus 1815. Both deltas sit at -75.1%.

The consistency of these margins is striking. Across all six tests, the Intel part trails by between 75.1% and 75.2%. This suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-dependent. The EPYC 74F3's advantage comes from having four times the cores, four times the memory bandwidth, and vastly more cache. The single-core results are particularly telling: even with a lower boost clock of 4.00 GHz versus the i5-11400H's 4.50 GHz, the EPYC 74F3 still delivers roughly four times the single-thread score. This indicates the Zen 3 architecture's instructions-per-clock efficiency far exceeds Tiger Lake in these Cinebench workloads.

The database records zero wins for the Intel part and six wins for the AMD part in this head-to-head set. The i5-11400H's higher boost clock and smaller process node do not translate into any benchmark victory in the recorded tests. The EPYC 74F3's larger thread count and memory subsystem dominate across the board.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors in the database:

• Cores: 6 (Intel) versus 24 (AMD)
• Threads: 12 versus 48
• Base Clock: 2.20 GHz versus 2.80 GHz
• Boost Clock: 4.50 GHz versus 4.00 GHz
• TDP: 35 W versus 240 W
• Socket: Intel BGA 1787 versus AMD Socket SP3
• Architecture: Tiger Lake versus Zen 3
• Codename: Tiger Lake-H versus Milan
• Process Node: 10 nm versus 7 nm
• Foundry: Intel versus TSMC
• Transistors: not listed versus 33,200 million
• Die Size: 190 mm² versus 4x 81 mm²
• L1 Cache: 80 KB per core versus 64 KB per core
• L2 Cache: 1.25 MB per core versus 512 KB per core
• L3 Cache: 12 MB shared versus 256 MB shared
• Memory Bus: Dual-channel versus Eight-channel
• Memory Bandwidth: 51.2 GB/s versus 204.8 GB/s
• ECC Memory: false versus true
• PCIe: Gen 4, 20 Lanes versus Gen 4, 128 Lanes
• Integrated Graphics: UHD Graphics versus none
• Market Segment: Mobile versus Server/Workstation
• Release Date: 2021-05-10 versus 2021-03-14
• Launch MSRP: $250 versus $2900
• Part Number: SRKT1 versus 100-000000317100-100000317WOF

Both processors share DDR4 memory support, active production status, and a locked multiplier. Both sit at the 69th percentile among all CPUs. The average benchmark score for the i5-11400H is 15749, while the EPYC 74F3 averages 14915, meaning the Intel part actually has a higher average across all tests in the database despite losing every Cinebench head-to-head. This reflects that the i5-11400H has many more recorded benchmark entries, including lighter workloads like PassMark tests, which drag the EPYC's average down relative to its Cinebench dominance.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The AMD EPYC 74F3 wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 51566 against the Intel Core i5-11400H's 12859, a delta of -75.1% for the Intel part. In R20 multi-core, the scores are 21657 versus 5400, and in R15 multi-core, 5197 versus 1296.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-11400H win any single-threaded tests?

A: No. The EPYC 74F3 wins every single-core test as well. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC 74F3 scores 7279 versus 1815 for the i5-11400H. In R20 single-core, it is 3057 versus 762, and in R15 single-core, 733 versus 182.

Q: How do their overall benchmark averages compare?

A: The Intel Core i5-11400H has an average benchmark score of 15749, while the AMD EPYC 74F3 averages 14915. Both processors sit at the 69th percentile among all CPUs. The i5-11400H's nearest rival is the AMD EPYC 9254 with a delta of 0%, while the EPYC 74F3's nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-9750H with a delta of 0.2%.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: The Intel Core i5-11400H supports dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD EPYC 74F3 supports eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth, exactly four times the Intel part's throughput. The EPYC 74F3 also supports ECC memory, which the i5-11400H does not.

Q: Are these processors in the same market segment?

A: No. The Intel Core i5-11400H is a mobile processor with a 35 W TDP and integrated UHD Graphics. The AMD EPYC 74F3 is a server/workstation processor with a 240 W TDP and no integrated graphics. The Intel part uses socket Intel BGA 1787, while the AMD part uses AMD Socket SP3.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes?

A: The AMD EPYC 74F3 provides 128 Gen 4 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel Core i5-11400H provides 20 Gen 4 lanes. This makes the EPYC 74F3 far more suitable for systems with many expansion cards, NVMe drives, or other high-bandwidth peripherals.