AMD EPYC 7501 vs Intel Core i5-13500E Comparison

The database pairs two processors from opposite ends of the market: the AMD EPYC 7501, a 32-core server part built on the Zen (Naples) architecture, and the Intel Core i5-13500E, a 14-core desktop processor from the Raptor Lake generation. Despite the gap in core counts and their different launch eras, the recorded Cinebench results place them remarkably close together, with the desktop part winning every single test. What follows is a step-by-step walk through the measurements.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data covers three Cinebench generations, and the pattern is strikingly uniform: the Core i5-13500E wins all six tests by a margin that barely moves.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-13500E scores 2295 against 2135 for the EPYC 7501, a 7% advantage. R15 single-core goes the same way, 323 versus 301, a 6.8% gap. Cinebench R20 multi-core reads 9564 for the Intel chip versus 8898 for the EPYC, again 7% apart, and the R20 single-core scores of 1349 and 1256 differ by 6.9%. Cinebench R23 repeats the story: multi-core 22772 versus 21186 (7%), single-core 3214 versus 2991 (6.9%).

That consistency is the most informative part of the dataset. A modern desktop processor with far fewer cores matches and slightly beats a many-core server part in every rendering workload, and the single-core margins (6.8 to 6.9%) are essentially identical to the multi-core margins (7%). The EPYC 7501 records zero wins across the six tests, so its 32 cores and 64 threads do not translate into a rendering advantage in this comparison.

Where Each One Wins

Strictly by benchmark wins, the split is total: the i5-13500E wins all six tests. The database records winsA as 0 and winsB as 6 for the EPYC and Intel parts respectively.

Within that clean sweep, the interpretation still splits by workload type. The i5-13500E is the clear choice for any workload that leans on single-thread speed: its boost clock of 4.60 GHz and per-core IPC gains show up as a consistent single-core lead of roughly 7% in all three Cinebench versions. For lightly threaded desktop applications, the data favors the Intel part without qualification.

The EPYC 7501, by contrast, does not win a benchmark here, but its strengths are structural rather than score-based. The recorded data shows eight-channel DDR4 with 170.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth, 64 MB of shared L3 cache, and support for dense concurrent workloads across its 32 cores and 64 threads. Its market segment is listed as Server/Workstation, not Desktop, and its nearest rivals in the database are server and HEDT parts such as the Intel Core i9-7940X and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X. Rendering tests are one lens; sustained multi-tenant server workloads are where its design points, even though this dataset contains no such benchmark.

Architecture Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every axis recorded in the database.

The EPYC 7501 uses AMD's Zen architecture, codename Naples, on a 14 nm GlobalFoundries process, with 4,800 million transistors packed into a 213 mm² die. It fits AMD Socket SP3 and carries a 170 W TDP. Its core configuration is 32 cores and 64 threads, with a 2000 MHz base clock and a 3.00 GHz boost. Cache per core is small (96 KB L1, 512 KB L2), but the shared L3 pool is large at 64 MB. Memory support is DDR4 only, across an eight-channel bus delivering 170.6 GB/s, with ECC supported. PCIe is Gen 3, and there is no integrated graphics. The multiplier is unlocked.

The i5-13500E uses Intel's Raptor Lake architecture, codename Raptor Lake-S, on a 10 nm Intel process. Its die size is nearly identical at 215 mm², but transistor count is not recorded. It runs 14 cores and 20 threads, a 2.40 GHz base clock and a 4.60 GHz boost, at a TDP of just 65 W in Intel Socket 1700. Per-core cache is larger (80 KB L1, 1.25 MB L2) while shared L3 is smaller at 24 MB. Memory support spans both DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus, with ECC supported, and PCIe is Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. It includes UHD Graphics 770 integrated graphics, which the EPYC lacks, and its multiplier is locked.

In short: an older, larger-core-count, high-bandwidth server design versus a newer, denser-node, faster-clocked desktop design with modern I/O.

FAQ

Q: Does the EPYC 7501 win any benchmark against the i5-13500E?

A: No. The database records zero benchmark wins for the EPYC 7501 across all six Cinebench tests; the i5-13500E wins all six.

Q: How large is the i5-13500E's advantage in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The i5-13500E scores 22772 versus 21186 for the EPYC 7501, a 7% lead.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The EPYC 7501. Its eight-channel DDR4 bus delivers 170.6 GB/s, while the i5-13500E uses a dual-channel bus and has no bandwidth figure recorded.

Q: How do the two compare against other CPUs in the database?

A: The i5-13500E sits in the 62nd percentile with an average benchmark score of 6586, close to rivals like the Intel Core i9-12900E (6611 average, 0.4% ahead). The EPYC 7501 sits in the 61st percentile with an average score of 6128, nearest to the Intel Core i9-7940X at 6147, just 0.3% ahead.

Q: Is there a single-core versus multi-core trade-off between them?

A: No meaningful one in this dataset. The i5-13500E's lead is 6.8 to 6.9% in single-core tests and 7% in multi-core tests, so it wins both categories by nearly the same margin.

Q: Which processor supports the newer PCIe standard?

A: The i5-13500E supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, while the EPYC 7501 is limited to Gen 3.

Specification Differences

• Cores/Threads: EPYC 7501 has 32 cores and 64 threads; i5-13500E has 14 cores and 20 threads.
• Clocks: EPYC 7501 runs a 2000 MHz base and 3.00 GHz boost; the i5-13500E runs 2.40 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost.
• TDP: 170 W for the EPYC 7501 versus 65 W for the i5-13500E.
• Architecture and node: Zen (Naples) on 14 nm GlobalFoundries versus Raptor Lake-S on 10 nm Intel.
• Socket: AMD Socket SP3 versus Intel Socket 1700.
• Cache: 96 KB L1 and 512 KB L2 per core with 64 MB shared L3 (EPYC) versus 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 per core with 24 MB shared L3 (Intel).
• Memory: DDR4 eight-channel at 170.6 GB/s (EPYC) versus DDR4/DDR5 dual-channel (Intel); both support ECC.
• PCIe: Gen 3 (EPYC) versus Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes (Intel).
• Integrated graphics: none on the EPYC; UHD Graphics 770 on the i5-13500E.
• Market segment: Server/Workstation versus Desktop.
• Multiplier: unlocked on the EPYC 7501; locked on the i5-13500E.
• Transistors: 4,800 million recorded for the EPYC; not recorded for the i5-13500E.
• Release date: the EPYC 7501 shipped in 2017; the i5-13500E shipped in 2023.

The Verdict

For anyone choosing on raw benchmark results, the data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i5-13500E wins all six Cinebench tests by 6.8 to 7%, in both single-core and multi-core, while drawing a listed 65 W against the EPYC's 170 W. For desktop and rendering workloads, it is the stronger recorded performer and the only winner in this dataset.

The EPYC 7501's case rests on platform characteristics the Cinebench suite does not measure: 32 cores and 64 threads for heavy concurrency, 170.6 GB/s of eight-channel memory bandwidth, 64 MB of shared L3, ECC memory, and an unlocked multiplier on the SP3 server platform. Buyers running dense virtualized or multi-threaded server workloads, or who need that memory subsystem, would weigh those structural advantages against a roughly 7% rendering deficit. Buyers doing anything else should follow the scores and pick the i5-13500E.