AMD EPYC 7502 vs Intel Core i3-1210U Comparison

The Intel Core i3-1210U and AMD EPYC 7502 occupy opposite ends of the computing spectrum: a 9 W mobile part designed for thin-and-light laptops versus a 180 W server/workstation processor built for datacenter density. Despite their divergent purposes, their average benchmark scores are remarkably close—12,795 for the i3-1210U and 12,709 for the EPYC 7502—placing both within 0.7% of each other in overall performance. However, that parity disappears entirely in the head-to-head benchmarks, where the EPYC 7502 wins all six tests by margins of roughly 80% or more. The data tells a story of two chips that achieve similar aggregate scores through completely different means: the i3-1210U leans on strong single-thread efficiency, while the EPYC 7502 crushes multi-threaded workloads with sheer core count.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The EPYC 7502 dominates every shared benchmark, with deltas consistently around -80.9%. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 43,940 against the i3-1210U’s 8,413—a 5.2× advantage. The gap persists in single-core: 6,203 versus 1,187 in R23 single-core, a delta of -80.9%. This pattern repeats across all Cinebench versions. In R20 multi-core, the EPYC posts 18,454 versus 3,533; in R15 multi-core, 4,428 versus 847. The single-core deltas are equally lopsided: R20 shows 2,605 versus 498, and R15 shows 625 versus 119. Every delta sits at -80.9% or -81%, indicating that the EPYC’s architectural advantage is consistent regardless of workload intensity or benchmark generation.

The i3-1210U’s average benchmark score of 12,795 comes entirely from PassMark tests, which are not part of the shared head-to-head suite. Its PassMark multi-thread score is 10,228, single-thread is 3,354, and floating-point math reaches 23,815. The EPYC 7502 has no PassMark entries in the data, so the aggregate comparison relies on the Cinebench results alone. This asymmetry explains the near-parity in average scores: the i3-1210U’s PassMark results are strong enough to match the EPYC’s Cinebench outputs, but when both chips run the identical Cinebench workloads, the EPYC’s lead is overwhelming. The largest single delta is -81% in R15 single-core, while the smallest remains -80.9% across all other tests—a remarkably uniform margin.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 7502 wins every multi-threaded Cinebench test by a factor of roughly five. Its 32 cores and 64 threads, running at a 2.50 GHz base clock, deliver 43,940 in R23 multi-core versus the i3-1210U’s 8,413. This makes the EPYC the clear choice for rendering, simulation, or any workload that scales across cores. The i3-1210U, with 6 cores and 8 threads, cannot compete in these scenarios—its R23 multi-core score is 19.1% of the EPYC’s output. Even in single-core tests, where the i3’s 4.40 GHz boost clock should help, the EPYC wins: 6,203 versus 1,187 in R23 single-core. The EPYC’s 3.35 GHz boost clock, combined with its Zen 2 architecture, provides superior per-thread performance despite a lower peak frequency.

However, the i3-1210U has strengths outside the shared benchmark suite. Its PassMark data-compression score of 102,965 and integer-math score of 34,445 suggest efficiency in specific tasks, though these are not compared head-to-head. The i3’s 9 W TDP and integrated UHD Graphics 64EU make it viable for fanless or low-power mobile designs, whereas the EPYC’s 180 W TDP requires robust server cooling. The EPYC’s eight-channel memory bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth target memory-intensive server workloads, while the i3’s dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 support suits mainstream laptops. In terms of market positioning, the EPYC is a server/workstation part with ECC memory support, while the i3 is mobile-only without ECC.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The i3-1210U uses Intel’s Alder Lake architecture on a 10 nm process, built by Intel’s own foundry. It features a hybrid configuration—though the data does not specify core types—with 6 cores and 8 threads, indicating some cores lack hyper-threading. The EPYC 7502 uses AMD’s Zen 2 architecture (codename Rome) on a 7 nm process from TSMC, with 32 cores and 64 threads, all fully threaded. The EPYC’s transistor count is listed at 3,800 million on a 74 mm² die, while the i3’s transistor and die size are not provided.

Cache hierarchies diverge sharply. The i3-1210U has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 10 MB shared L3. The EPYC 7502 has 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 128 MB shared L3—12.8× more L3. This massive L3 cache, typical of EPYC Rome’s chiplet design, helps keep 64 threads fed with data. The EPYC also supports ECC memory and an eight-channel DDR4 bus, while the i3 uses dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 without ECC. Both support PCIe Gen 4. The EPYC’s socket is AMD Socket SP3, designed for multi-socket servers, whereas the i3 uses Intel BGA 1781, a soldered mobile package. The EPYC has no integrated graphics; the i3 includes UHD Graphics 64EU.

Specification Differences

The most striking difference is core count: the EPYC 7502 has 32 cores versus the i3-1210U’s 6, a 5.3× gap. Threads follow suit at 64 versus 8. Base clocks differ: 2.50 GHz for the EPYC versus 1.00 GHz for the i3, while boost clocks are 3.35 GHz versus 4.40 GHz—the i3’s only clock-speed advantage. TDP is a 20× difference: 180 W versus 9 W. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3; the i3 uses Intel BGA 1781. Manufacturing nodes are 7 nm (TSMC) for the EPYC and 10 nm (Intel) for the i3. L3 cache is 128 MB versus 10 MB. Memory support: the EPYC uses eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth; the i3 uses dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 with no bandwidth figure listed. ECC memory is supported only on the EPYC. The EPYC’s part number is 100-000000054; the i3 has none listed. The EPYC has 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die; the i3 has no such data. Release dates differ: the EPYC launched August 2019, the i3 February 2022. The EPYC’s percentile is 67, the i3’s 68.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i3-1210U has an average benchmark score of 12,795, slightly ahead of the AMD EPYC 7502’s 12,709, a delta of 0.7%.

Q: How much faster is the EPYC 7502 in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The EPYC 7502 scores 43,940 versus the i3-1210U’s 8,413, a delta of -80.9% relative to the EPYC, meaning the EPYC is roughly 5.2× faster.

Q: Does the i3-1210U win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The EPYC 7502 wins all six shared benchmarks, with deltas ranging from -80.9% to -81%.

Q: What explains the similar average scores despite the EPYC’s dominance?

A: The i3-1210U’s average includes PassMark tests (e.g., data compression at 102,965, integer math at 34,445) that are not part of the head-to-head suite, boosting its aggregate score. The EPYC’s average relies only on Cinebench results.

Q: Which chip supports ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD EPYC 7502 supports ECC memory, along with eight-channel DDR4 and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. The i3-1210U uses dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 without ECC.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The i3-1210U has a 9 W TDP, while the EPYC 7502 has a 180 W TDP. This 20× difference reflects their mobile versus server/workstation market segments.