AMD EPYC 7502 vs Intel Core i3-1215U Comparison

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 7502 is in a completely different performance class than the Intel Core i3-1215U. Across every Cinebench test in the dataset, the EPYC 7502 delivers a victory, with deltas ranging from 561.3% to 564.9% in its favor. This is not a contest between equals; it is a server processor against a low-power mobile chip, and the numbers reflect that chasm. The Intel part’s only advantage lies in its integrated graphics and dual-memory support, but on raw compute, the EPYC 7502 dominates decisively.

The Verdict

Choose the AMD EPYC 7502 if your workload demands massive parallel throughput. The data shows a 32-core, 64-thread Zen 2 processor with a 128 MB shared L3 cache and eight-channel DDR4 memory support, delivering an average benchmark score of 12,709. Its nearest rival, the Intel Xeon Gold 6348, scores 12,746, a mere 0.3% difference, placing the EPYC 7502 in the same performance tier as that Xeon. The EPYC also sits within 0.5% of the Intel Core i3-10105F and within 0.6% of the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X, per the average score data.

Choose the Intel Core i3-1215U only if the integrated UHD Graphics 64EU is a hard requirement, or if the mobile form factor (BGA 1744 socket) is non-negotiable. Its 6 cores and 8 threads are dwarfed by the EPYC’s 32 cores and 64 threads. The i3-1215U’s average benchmark score of 12,604 is nearly identical to the EPYC’s 12,709 on a percentage basis (a 0.8% gap in the EPYC’s favor), but this average is skewed by its Passmark integer and floating-point results, not by Cinebench. In the head-to-head Cinebench tests, the i3-1215U loses every single one, with its best showing being a 6,644 score in Cinebench R23 multi-core versus the EPYC’s 43,940. For any multi-threaded rendering, simulation, or database workload, the verdict is the EPYC 7502, without qualification.

Architecture Differences

The AMD EPYC 7502 is built on the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Rome, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 3,800 million transistors into a 74 mm² die. In contrast, the Intel Core i3-1215U uses the Alder Lake architecture (Alder Lake-U), built on Intel’s 10 nm process, with no transistor or die size data provided. The EPYC’s cache hierarchy is far larger: 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a 128 MB shared L3. The i3-1215U has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and only 10 MB shared L3.

Memory support differs sharply. The EPYC 7502 runs DDR4 over an eight-channel bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s and full ECC support. The i3-1215U supports both DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, but the fact pack lists no memory bandwidth figure and no ECC capability. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3, while the i3 uses Intel BGA 1744. The EPYC also has no integrated graphics; the i3-1215U includes UHD Graphics 64EU. Both support PCIe Gen 4, but the i3 is limited to 20 lanes (CPU only), whereas the EPYC’s lane count is not specified in the pack. The EPYC’s TDP is 180 W versus the i3’s 15 W, and the EPYC’s base clock is 2.50 GHz compared to the i3’s 1200.00 MHz base (with a 4.40 GHz boost).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results are staggeringly one-sided. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7502 scores 4,428 against the i3-1215U’s 669, a delta of 561.9%. Single-core R15 shows the EPYC at 625 versus 94, a 564.9% advantage. Moving to Cinebench R20, the EPYC’s multi-core score is 18,454, while the i3 manages only 2,790, a 561.4% delta. In R20 single-core, the EPYC posts 2,605 versus 393, a 562.8% lead. Cinebench R23 multi-core sees the EPYC at 43,940 and the i3 at 6,644, a 561.3% gap. R23 single-core is 6,203 for the EPYC versus 938 for the i3, again a 561.3% delta. Across all six tests, the EPYC wins by a factor of roughly 6.6x. The i3-1215U’s win count is zero.

The i3-1215U does have additional benchmarks in its fact pack that the EPYC lacks, including Geekbench (multi-core 4,365, single-core 1,485) and several Passmark tests (integer math 35,534, floating-point math 25,379, multithread 10,472, single-thread 3,218). These are not head-to-head comparisons, so they do not affect the win tally, but they show the i3’s absolute capability in other workloads. For example, its Passmark data encryption score is 7,041, and its extended instructions score is 6,868. These numbers are useful for context but do not bridge the Cinebench canyon.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge on nearly every specification field. The EPYC 7502 has 32 cores and 64 threads; the i3-1215U has 6 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 2.50 GHz versus 1200.00 MHz, with boost clocks of 3.35 GHz and 4.40 GHz, respectively. TDP is 180 W against 15 W. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3; the i3 uses Intel BGA 1744. Process nodes are 7 nm (TSMC) versus 10 nm (Intel). Cache sizes differ massively: L1 is 96 KB per core versus 80 KB per core; L2 is 512 KB per core versus 1.25 MB per core; L3 is 128 MB shared versus 10 MB shared.

Memory support: the EPYC is DDR4-only with an eight-channel bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth; the i3 supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and no bandwidth figure. ECC is true on the EPYC, false on the i3. The EPYC has no integrated graphics; the i3 has UHD Graphics 64EU. The EPYC’s market segment is Server/Workstation; the i3’s is Mobile. The EPYC’s release date is 2019-08-06, while the i3’s is 2022-02-22. The EPYC’s part number is 100-000000054; the i3’s is SRLFU. Neither has a launch MSRP listed, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7502 has 32 cores and 64 threads. The Intel Core i3-1215U has 6 cores and 8 threads.

Q: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, how much faster is the EPYC 7502?

A: The EPYC 7502 scores 43,940, while the i3-1215U scores 6,644. This is a 561.3% advantage for the EPYC.

Q: Does the Intel Core i3-1215U have any integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the i3-1215U includes UHD Graphics 64EU. The EPYC 7502 has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The EPYC 7502 supports DDR4 over an eight-channel bus with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. The i3-1215U supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, but its bandwidth is not listed in the data.

Q: Which chip supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7502 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i3-1215U does not.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The EPYC 7502 has an average benchmark score of 12,709, and the i3-1215U has an average of 12,604. The EPYC is 0.8% higher, though the head-to-head Cinebench tests show a much larger gap.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7502 wins in every head-to-head Cinebench test, making it the clear choice for multi-threaded rendering, scientific computing, and server-side workloads. Its 32 cores, 64 threads, and 128 MB L3 cache are built for parallel tasks, and the 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth supports large datasets. The data shows it is competitive with the Intel Xeon Gold 6348 (0.3% difference in average score) and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X (0.6% difference), placing it squarely in high-end workstation territory. For any scenario where Cinebench scores matter—such as 3D rendering or CPU-bound simulation—the EPYC 7502 is the only rational pick based on this data.

The Intel Core i3-1215U has zero head-to-head wins, but it has strengths outside the Cinebench suite. It includes integrated graphics, which the EPYC lacks entirely. Its mobile socket (BGA 1744) and 15 W TDP indicate a low-power, portable design. It also supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, offering flexibility in memory choice. Its Passmark scores, while not compared directly, show capability in integer math (35,534) and floating-point math (25,379). The i3-1215U is the winner for ultra-portable laptops or fanless designs where power draw and heat are the primary constraints, not raw compute. For a database server or render farm, the EPYC 7502 is the only sensible option; for a thin-and-light client, the i3-1215U makes more sense. The benchmark data does not support any other conclusion.