AMD EPYC 7501 vs Intel Core i9-7940X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a remarkably consistent picture: the Intel Core i9-7940X wins all six head-to-head tests, but by margins so narrow that they fall within typical run-to-run variance. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, Intel scores 2161 against AMD's 2135, a 1.2% advantage. The single-core R15 result is similar: 305 versus 301, a 1.3% edge for Intel. This pattern repeats across every workload in the comparison.

Cinebench R20 shows the same 1.2% delta in both multi-core and single-core tests. Intel posts 9006 and 1271, while AMD posts 8898 and 1256. The latest Cinebench R23 iteration maintains the trend exactly: Intel leads by 1.2% in multi-core (21444 vs 21186) and again by 1.2% in single-core (3027 vs 2991). Every test, every generation of the benchmark, yields the same mathematical outcome — Intel ahead by roughly one point in every hundred.

The aggregate benchmark scores reinforce this near-parity. The Intel part carries an average benchmark score of 6147, while the AMD EPYC 7501 sits at 6128. That works out to Intel being 0.3% ahead in the overall average. The nearestRivals data for Intel confirms the tight grouping: the EPYC 7501 is the closest competitor at a 0.3% delta, followed by the AMD EPYC 7272 at -0.6%, the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X at -1.4%, and the Ryzen 3 3100U at -1.6%. From AMD's perspective, the i9-7940X is its nearest rival at -0.3%, with the EPYC 7272 at -0.9%, Threadripper 1950X at -1.7%, and Ryzen 3 3100U at -1.9%.

What is striking is not that Intel wins, but how uniformly it wins. There is no workload category where AMD's 32-core design pulls ahead. The largest margin anywhere is the 1.3% single-core R15 result. For a chip with more than twice the core count, that is a notable outcome — the EPYC 7501's additional cores do not translate into any benchmark victory, even in heavily threaded Cinebench workloads.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental design philosophies diverge sharply. Intel's Core i9-7940X uses a Skylake-X architecture fabricated on Intel's 14 nm process, with a die size of 484 mm². It packs 14 cores and 28 threads, running at a base clock of 3.10 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The cache hierarchy consists of 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 19.25 MB of shared L3. Memory support is DDR4 over a quad-channel bus, delivering 85.3 GB/s of bandwidth. It does not support ECC memory. The platform uses Intel Socket 2066, and the CPU provides 44 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. It launched with a 165 W TDP and a launch MSRP of $1399.

AMD's EPYC 7501 takes the opposite approach. Built on the Zen architecture (Naples codename) at GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process, it uses a 213 mm² die with 4,800 million transistors. The core count is 32 cores and 64 threads — more than double Intel's thread count. However, clocks are substantially lower: 2.00 GHz base and 3.00 GHz boost. The L1 cache is 96 KB per core, L2 is 512 KB per core, and L3 is a much larger 64 MB shared pool. Memory bandwidth is double Intel's at 170.6 GB/s, delivered through an eight-channel DDR4 bus. ECC memory is supported. The socket is AMD Socket SP3, and PCIe is Gen 3 (lane count not specified in the data). The TDP is 170 W, marginally higher than Intel's 165 W.

The die size difference is dramatic: Intel's monolithic 484 mm² die versus AMD's 213 mm² design. That AMD achieves comparable performance with a die less than half the size, while running 32 cores, speaks to the efficiency of its chiplet-based approach. The clocks tell the story of the trade-off: Intel's 4.40 GHz boost versus AMD's 3.00 GHz boost is a 1.4 GHz gap, yet the benchmarks show only a 1.2% performance difference in the tested workloads. The larger L3 cache (64 MB vs 19.25 MB) and doubled memory bandwidth (170.6 GB/s vs 85.3 GB/s) likely compensate for the clock deficit in throughput-oriented tasks.

Production status differs as well. Intel's part is end-of-life, released on 2017-08-31. AMD's EPYC 7501 remains active in production, released earlier on 2017-06-28. Both have unlocked multipliers. Both lack integrated graphics. The market segments are clear: Intel targets Desktop, AMD targets Server/Workstation.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-7940X wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. That is the complete data-driven answer. The wins are narrow — 1.2% to 1.3% across six tests — but they are unanimous. Looking at the benchmark breakdown, Intel's advantage is consistent in both single-core and multi-core workloads. The Cinebench R23 single-core result of 3027 versus 2991 demonstrates that Intel's higher clock speed provides a real, if small, edge in latency-sensitive tasks.

For AMD, the wins are not in the benchmark scores but in the platform capabilities. The EPYC 7501 offers ECC memory support, which Intel lacks. It provides double the memory bandwidth (170.6 GB/s) and double the memory channels (eight vs four). The L3 cache is more than triple the size. These features do not show up in Cinebench scores, but they matter for memory-intensive server workloads, data integrity requirements, and large working sets. The active production status means continued availability, whereas Intel's part is end-of-life.

The core count disparity — 32 cores and 64 threads versus 14 cores and 28 threads — is a theoretical advantage for AMD in workloads that scale perfectly with core count. The benchmark data shows that Cinebench does not deliver such scaling for this comparison, as AMD's lower clocks offset the core advantage. For workloads that are more memory-bandwidth-bound or cache-sensitive, the EPYC 7501's architectural features could plausibly flip the result, but that is not demonstrated in this data set.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i9-7940X outperforms the AMD EPYC 7501 in every measured test. The margins are small — never exceeding 1.3% — but they are consistent across all six head-to-head benchmarks and the aggregate average score (6147 vs 6128). If the decision rests solely on Cinebench performance, Intel wins, period.

However, the verdict requires context beyond the scores. The Intel part is a desktop processor with a 165 W TDP, quad-channel memory, no ECC support, and an end-of-life status. The AMD part is an active server/workstation processor with a 170 W TDP, eight-channel memory, ECC support, and 64 MB of L3 cache. For a desktop user running the applications represented in these benchmarks, the i9-7940X is the correct choice. It wins the tests, uses a mainstream desktop socket, and offers unlocked multipliers for overclocking.

For a server or workstation deployment, the EPYC 7501's features outside the benchmark suite become decisive. ECC memory is non-negotiable in many enterprise environments. The doubled memory bandwidth and eight-channel architecture serve virtualization, database, and scientific computing workloads that stress memory subsystems far more than Cinebench does. The 32-core count provides headroom for heavily threaded server processes. The data shows AMD loses the Cinebench comparison, but the data also shows AMD wins on platform attributes that the benchmarks do not measure.

The percentile ranking places both at the 61st percentile among all CPUs, reinforcing the near-equivalence of their overall performance. The user who prioritizes the tested benchmarks should choose Intel. The user who prioritizes memory bandwidth, ECC, core count, and production longevity should choose AMD. The data does not support a universal recommendation either way.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i9-7940X has an average benchmark score of 6147, while the AMD EPYC 7501 scores 6128. Intel leads by 0.3%.

Q: How much faster is the Intel part in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: Intel scores 21444 versus AMD's 21186, a 1.2% advantage. This is the same 1.2% delta seen in Cinebench R20 multi-core (9006 vs 8898) and R15 multi-core (2161 vs 2135).

Q: Does the AMD EPYC 7501 win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The Intel Core i9-7940X wins all six head-to-head benchmarks. The AMD part's closest result is the Cinebench R15 single-core test, where it trails by 1.3% (301 vs 305).

Q: What memory features differ between the two processors?

A: The Intel part uses quad-channel DDR4 with 85.3 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support. The AMD part uses eight-channel DDR4 with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth and supports ECC memory.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i9-7940X has 14 cores and 28 threads. The AMD EPYC 7501 has 32 cores and 64 threads.

Q: Which processor has the larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD EPYC 7501 has 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core i9-7940X has 19.25 MB of shared L3 cache. AMD's L3 is more than triple the size.