AMD EPYC 7502P vs Intel Core i5-1035G1 Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD EPYC 7502P and Intel Core i5-1035G1 occupy completely different segments of the processor market, and the benchmark data reflects that separation clearly. The EPYC 7502P wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with margins ranging from 615.8% to 616.5% across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core tests.

The EPYC 7502P is the choice for server and workstation workloads. Its 32 cores and 64 threads deliver massive parallel throughput, and its 66th percentile ranking among all CPUs places it in the upper tier of the database. The Core i5-1035G1, meanwhile, sits at the 65th percentile, which is remarkably close given the massive core-count difference, but its strength lies in a different domain entirely. It is a mobile processor with integrated graphics, a 15 W TDP, and a focus on efficiency for laptop-class systems.

The data shows that the EPYC 7502P is the clear winner in raw compute performance. The Core i5-1035G1 should be selected only when the target platform is a thin-and-light mobile device where power draw, physical footprint, and integrated graphics are the governing constraints. The nearest rivals for the EPYC 7502P are the AMD EPYC 7D12 (0.3% lower average score), Intel Core i7-4790 (0.4% lower), Intel Xeon W-3175X (1.4% higher), and Intel Xeon Gold 6338N (1.6% higher). For the Core i5-1035G1, the nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-3770 (0.2% lower), AMD EPYC 7402P (1.6% lower), Intel Core i7-7700HQ (2% lower), and Intel Core 3 N350 (2.2% higher).

Architecture Differences

The EPYC 7502P is built on AMD's Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Rome, and represents the EPYC 7002 series. It uses a 7 nm process node manufactured by TSMC, with 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. The Core i5-1035G1 uses Intel's Ice Lake architecture, more specifically the Sunny Cove-U core design, built on a 10 nm process node from Intel with a 123 mm² die size. The process node difference is significant: the EPYC 7502P packs far more transistors into a smaller die, which helps explain its enormous core count.

The EPYC 7502P offers 32 cores and 64 threads, while the Core i5-1035G1 offers only 4 cores and 8 threads. Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The EPYC 7502P has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and a massive 128 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core i5-1035G1 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The L3 cache difference alone is a factor of over 21, which matters greatly for workloads that repeatedly access large datasets.

Memory architecture also diverges sharply. The EPYC 7502P supports DDR4 memory across an eight-channel memory bus with 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth and ECC memory support. The Core i5-1035G1 supports DDR4 across a dual-channel bus with 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth and no ECC support. The EPYC 7502P uses PCIe Gen 4, while the Core i5-1035G1 uses PCIe Gen 3. The EPYC 7502P has no integrated graphics, while the Core i5-1035G1 includes Intel UHD Graphics. The socket types are incompatible: the EPYC 7502P uses AMD Socket SP3, while the Core i5-1035G1 uses Intel BGA 1526.

The power envelopes could not be more different. The EPYC 7502P has a 180 W TDP and a base clock of 2.50 GHz with a boost clock of 3.35 GHz. The Core i5-1035G1 has a 15 W TDP, a base clock of 1000.00 MHz (1.00 GHz), and a boost clock of 3.60 GHz. The Core i5-1035G1 actually has a higher boost clock, which helps explain why its single-core performance deficit is not even larger than it is.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 7502P wins everywhere the benchmark suite measures compute performance. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 4374 against 611, a 615.9% advantage. In R20 multi-core, it scores 18225 against 2546, a 615.8% advantage. In R23 multi-core, it scores 43395 against 6062, a 615.9% advantage. The pattern is consistent across all three Cinebench versions: the EPYC 7502P delivers roughly seven times the multi-core throughput.

What is more surprising is that the EPYC 7502P also wins single-core tests by similar margins. In Cinebench R15 single-core, it scores 617 against 86, a 617.4% advantage. In R20 single-core, it scores 2572 against 359, a 616.4% advantage. In R23 single-core, it scores 6126 against 855, a 616.5% advantage. This suggests the Core i5-1035G1's low base clock of 1000.00 MHz significantly hampers its single-threaded performance, despite its higher 3.60 GHz boost clock.

The Core i5-1035G1 does have additional benchmark data beyond Cinebench, including PassMark tests that cover data compression, encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating-point math, integer math, multithreaded performance, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread performance. Its PassMark single-thread score is 2198, and its multithread score is 7211. However, no corresponding PassMark scores exist for the EPYC 7502P in the database, so direct comparison on these tests is not possible. The Core i5-1035G1's data compression score of 80534 is notable, as is its floating-point math score of 15483 and integer math score of 26645.

For real-world use cases, the EPYC 7502P is suited for server virtualization, database workloads, scientific computing, and any parallel processing task that can use 32 cores and 64 threads. Its 128 MB L3 cache and eight-channel memory with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth make it ideal for memory-intensive workloads. The Core i5-1035G1 is suited for mobile productivity, light content creation, and everyday computing where its 15 W TDP and integrated UHD Graphics allow for fanless or low-noise laptop designs.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD EPYC 7502P has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the Intel Core i5-1035G1 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: How large is the performance gap in multi-core workloads?

A: Across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests, the AMD EPYC 7502P leads by 615.8% to 615.9%. In R23 multi-core, the EPYC 7502P scores 43395 while the Core i5-1035G1 scores 6062.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-1035G1 win any benchmark comparisons?

A: No. The AMD EPYC 7502P wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons in the database, covering Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core modes.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i5-1035G1 includes Intel UHD Graphics. The AMD EPYC 7502P has no integrated graphics.

Q: How do their memory systems compare?

A: The AMD EPYC 7502P uses an eight-channel DDR4 memory bus with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support. The Intel Core i5-1035G1 uses a dual-channel DDR4 bus with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support.

Q: What are the cache sizes?

A: The AMD EPYC 7502P has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 128 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core i5-1035G1 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkably consistent in their margins. Every single comparison shows the AMD EPYC 7502P winning by a margin between 615.8% and 616.5%. This consistency suggests that the performance difference is driven by fundamental architectural scaling rather than workload-specific factors.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7502P scores 4374 against 611 for the Core i5-1035G1, a 615.9% delta. In R15 single-core, the EPYC 7502P scores 617 against 86, a 617.4% delta. The single-core margin is slightly larger than the multi-core margin, which is notable given that the Core i5-1035G1 has a higher boost clock of 3.60 GHz compared to 3.35 GHz for the EPYC 7502P. The Core i5-1035G1's very low base clock of 1000.00 MHz may be the limiting factor here, as sustained single-thread workloads may not reach the boost ceiling in the test environment.

In Cinebench R20, the EPYC 7502P scores 18225 in multi-core against 2546, a 615.8% delta. In single-core, it scores 2572 against 359, a 616.4% delta. The R20 single-core margin is slightly larger than the R20 multi-core margin, continuing the pattern from R15. In Cinebench R23, the EPYC 7502P scores 43395 in multi-core against 6062, a 615.9% delta. In single-core, it scores 6126 against 855, a 616.5% delta.

The consistency of these deltas across three generations of Cinebench is striking. The R15, R20, and R23 tests stress different aspects of the CPU pipeline, yet the relative performance gap remains nearly constant. This indicates that the EPYC 7502P's advantage is not tied to any particular instruction set feature or caching behavior that one Cinebench version happens to exercise more heavily. Instead, it reflects a broad, across-the-board superiority in both integer and floating-point throughput.

The average benchmark score in the database tells a slightly different story. The EPYC 7502P has an average benchmark score of 10512, while the Core i5-1035G1 has an average of 9684. The gap is much smaller here, at roughly 8.5%, because the average includes a broader set of tests, some of which favor the Core i5-1035G1's strengths. The Core i5-1035G1's PassMark scores, such as 80534 in data compression and 26645 in integer math, likely pull its average upward relative to its Cinebench results.

The percentile rankings are close: the EPYC 7502P sits at the 66th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core i5-1035G1 sits at the 65th percentile. This near-parity in percentile ranking, despite the massive Cinebench disparities, suggests that the database's broader benchmark suite captures capabilities that the Cinebench tests do not. The Core i5-1035G1's integrated graphics and mobile-oriented feature set may contribute to its competitive percentile ranking in ways that raw CPU compute tests do not reflect.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification category. The AMD EPYC 7502P has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the Intel Core i5-1035G1 has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 2.50 GHz for the EPYC 7502P and 1000.00 MHz for the Core i5-1035G1. Boost clocks are 3.35 GHz and 3.60 GHz respectively, with the Intel part holding a slight advantage in peak frequency.

The TDP difference is the largest single specification gap. The EPYC 7502P draws 180 W, while the Core i5-1035G1 draws 15 W, a factor of 12. This reflects their intended platforms: the EPYC 7502P is a server processor for AMD Socket SP3, while the Core i5-1035G1 is a mobile processor for Intel BGA 1526. The market segments confirm this: the EPYC 7502P is listed as Server/Workstation, while the Core i5-1035G1 is listed as Mobile.

Process technology differs as well. The EPYC 7502P uses a 7 nm process from TSMC with 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. The Core i5-1035G1 uses a 10 nm process from Intel on a 123 mm² die. The EPYC 7502P has no transistor count listed for comparison.

Cache configurations differ in both per-core and aggregate terms. The EPYC 7502P has 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 128 MB of shared L3. The Core i5-1035G1 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. Memory support also differs: the EPYC 7502P uses eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support, while the Core i5-1035G1 uses dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC.

PCIe generation differs, with the EPYC 7502P supporting Gen 4 and the Core i5-1035G1 supporting Gen 3. Integrated graphics are present only on the Core i5-1035G1, which includes UHD Graphics. The EPYC 7502P has no integrated graphics. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. Release dates are close: the Core i5-1035G1 launched on 2019-07-31, and the EPYC 7502P launched on 2019-08-06. Both processors remain in active production status.