AMD EPYC 74F3 vs Intel Core i7-9750H Comparison

The AMD EPYC 74F3 and Intel Core i7-9750H occupy opposite ends of the computing spectrum, yet their average benchmark scores place them within 0.2% of each other. This creates a fascinating statistical paradox: two processors with nearly identical aggregate performance, but wildly different architectures, core counts, and intended use cases. The EPYC 74F3 is a 24-core, 48-thread server behemoth built on TSMC's 7 nm process, while the i7-9750H is a 6-core, 12-thread mobile chip on Intel's 14 nm node. The data reveals that their similar average scores mask a complete divergence in workload behavior.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head Cinebench results are not competitive; they are a demonstration of scale. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 74F3 scores 5197 against the i7-9750H's 904, a delta of 474.9%. The R20 multi-core test shows a similar gap: 21657 versus 3768, which is 474.8% higher. The R23 multi-core result continues the pattern, with the EPYC at 51566 and the i7 at 8973, a 474.7% difference. These are not marginal wins; the EPYC is consistently around 4.75 times faster in every multi-threaded Cinebench test.

What is more surprising is the single-core performance. The EPYC 74F3 wins every single-core test by a similar margin. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the EPYC scores 733 versus the i7's 127, a 477.2% advantage. R20 single-core shows 3057 versus 531, a 475.7% delta. Even R23 single-core, where the i7's 4.50 GHz boost clock should help, the EPYC's 7279 dwarfs the i7's 1266, a 475% difference. This is counterintuitive for a server chip; the data suggests the EPYC's Zen 3 architecture delivers far superior instructions-per-clock at these workloads, or the i7-9750H's single-core scores are anomalously low in this dataset.

The head-to-head tally is decisive: the EPYC 74F3 wins all 6 benchmarks, with the i7-9750H winning none. The smallest delta is 474.7%, which means the EPYC is never less than 4.7 times faster in any compared test. This is not a close contest by any metric within the Cinebench suite. The average benchmark scores, which place the two within 0.2% of each other, are clearly driven by other tests not included in the head-to-head comparison, suggesting the i7-9750H has strengths in workloads not represented here.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 74F3 wins exclusively in the six Cinebench tests, covering both multi-core and single-core scenarios. Its multi-core dominance is expected given 24 cores versus 6 cores, but its single-core victory is the more telling result. The data implies that for rendering, simulation, or any CPU-bound compute task, the EPYC 74F3 is the clear choice. The 256 MB of shared L3 cache and eight-channel DDR4 memory bus provide a massive data pipeline that the i7-9750H's 12 MB L3 and dual-channel memory cannot match.

The i7-9750H has no wins in the head-to-head data, but its average benchmark score of 14886 versus the EPYC's 14915 suggests it must excel elsewhere. The i7 includes PassMark tests that the EPYC lacks, such as data compression (150443), data encryption (3756), and floating-point math (23343). While these scores are not directly compared, they contribute to the i7's aggregate. The i7 also has an integrated UHD 630 GPU, which the EPYC lacks entirely, giving the mobile chip an advantage in systems without discrete graphics. The i7's 45 W TDP versus the EPYC's 240 W TDP indicates it is designed for thermal-constrained environments where the EPYC would be impractical.

The data suggests a use-case split: the EPYC 74F3 for server workloads that leverage massive parallelism and memory bandwidth, and the i7-9750H for mobile or compact systems where power consumption and integrated graphics matter more than raw compute. The i7's 4.50 GHz boost clock is higher than the EPYC's 4.00 GHz, but this does not translate into Cinebench wins, implying the EPYC's architecture compensates with better efficiency per clock.

The Verdict

The AMD EPYC 74F3 is the benchmark winner in every head-to-head test, with deltas ranging from 474.7% to 477.2%. Anyone selecting a processor strictly for Cinebench performance should choose the EPYC 74F3 without hesitation. Its 24 cores, 48 threads, and 256 MB L3 cache deliver scores that the i7-9750H cannot approach, even in single-threaded tests. The EPYC's 69th percentile ranking among all CPUs and its average score of 14915, which is 0.2% ahead of the i7's 14886, confirm its aggregate superiority.

However, the i7-9750H is not without merit. Its 45 W TDP makes it suitable for laptops, where the EPYC's 240 W TDP would be impossible to cool. The i7's integrated UHD 630 graphics provide display output without a discrete GPU, a feature entirely absent from the EPYC. The i7 is also end-of-life, while the EPYC remains active, but this does not affect performance. For mobile users who need a capable processor in a thin chassis, the i7-9750H is the only viable choice in this comparison.

The verdict depends on context. In a server rack, the EPYC 74F3 is the obvious pick. In a laptop, the i7-9750H is the only option. The average benchmark scores are almost identical, but the underlying performance profiles are polar opposites. The data shows that aggregate scores can be misleading; the EPYC's multi-core might is balanced by the i7's strengths in PassMark tests, but the head-to-head Cinebench results leave no doubt about which processor is faster in rendering workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD EPYC 74F3 has an average score of 14915, which is 0.2% higher than the Intel Core i7-9750H's 14886.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in the head-to-head tests?

A: The largest delta is 477.2%, achieved by the EPYC 74F3 over the i7-9750H in Cinebench R15 single-core, with scores of 733 versus 127.

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-9750H win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The i7-9750H wins zero of the six head-to-head benchmarks, all of which are Cinebench tests.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The AMD EPYC 74F3 has 24 cores and 48 threads. The Intel Core i7-9750H has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 74F3 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i7-9750H does not.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD EPYC 74F3 has a TDP of 240 W, while the Intel Core i7-9750H has a TDP of 45 W.

Architecture Differences

The EPYC 74F3 is built on AMD's Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Milan, using a 7 nm process from TSMC. It features 33,200 million transistors spread across a 4x 81 mm² die configuration. The i7-9750H uses Intel's Coffee Lake-HR architecture on a 14 nm process, with a die size of 149 mm² and no listed transistor count. The EPYC's cache hierarchy includes 64 KB L1 and 512 KB L2 per core, plus a massive 256 MB shared L3 cache. The i7 has 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, with only 12 MB shared L3.

Memory architecture differs substantially. The EPYC supports DDR4 memory over an eight-channel bus, yielding 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The i7 also supports DDR4 but over a dual-channel bus, providing only 42.7 GB/s. The EPYC includes 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, while the i7 uses PCIe Gen 3 with no lane count specified. The EPYC has no integrated graphics, while the i7 includes UHD 630. The EPYC is a server/workstation part on AMD Socket SP3, while the i7 is a mobile chip on Intel BGA 1440. The EPYC's process node advantage (7 nm versus 14 nm) partially explains its performance lead despite higher power draw.

Specification Differences

The core count is the most obvious difference: 24 versus 6, with threads at 48 versus 12. Base clocks are 2.80 GHz for the EPYC and 2.60 GHz for the i7, while boost clocks are 4.00 GHz and 4.50 GHz respectively. TDP is 240 W versus 45 W. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3; the i7 uses Intel BGA 1440. The EPYC has 256 MB L3 cache; the i7 has 12 MB. Memory bus width is eight-channel versus dual-channel, with bandwidth at 204.8 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on the EPYC but not the i7. The EPYC has 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes; the i7 has PCIe Gen 3 with unspecified lane count. The i7 has integrated UHD 630 graphics; the EPYC has none. The EPYC's process node is 7 nm; the i7's is 14 nm. The EPYC is active in production, while the i7 is end-of-life. The EPYC has a launch MSRP of $2900; the i7 has no launch MSRP listed.