AMD EPYC 7502P vs Intel Core i7-4790 Comparison

The benchmark data presents a stark generational and architectural divide. The AMD EPYC 7502P is the overwhelming performance victor, winning seven of eight head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core i7-4790 secures a single, notable win in a specific single-threaded test. The data shows a clear verdict: for any multi-threaded workload, the EPYC 7502P is in a different performance class, while the i7-4790 retains a niche advantage in a particular legacy single-core metric.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dominant pattern is the EPYC 7502P’s total supremacy in Cinebench tests. Across all three versions (R15, R20, R23), the AMD processor delivers scores that are consistently 85.8% higher than the Intel part. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 43,395 points versus the i7-4790’s 6,171. This is not a marginal lead; it is a performance gap of nearly 7x, reflecting the fundamental difference in core count and memory bandwidth. Even in Cinebench R23 single-core, where clock speed and per-core efficiency matter most, the EPYC still wins with a score of 6,126 against the i7-4790’s 871, a delta of -85.8%.

The Geekbench results are more nuanced. In the multi-core test, the EPYC 7502P again wins decisively, scoring 7,822 against the i7-4790’s 3,927, a 49.8% advantage. This is a smaller lead than in Cinebench, but still a clear victory for the 32-core processor. However, the single-core Geekbench test is the one bright spot for Intel. The Core i7-4790 scores 1,164, defeating the EPYC’s 963 by a margin of 20.9%. This is a significant single-threaded win, suggesting that for certain legacy or lightly-threaded applications, the older Intel architecture's higher clock speed and mature single-core design can still hold an edge.

The aggregate data reinforces this split. While the EPYC 7502P’s average benchmark score is 10,512, it is statistically tied with the i7-4790, which averages 10,556. The nearest rival data shows a delta of only 0.4% between the two, with the Intel part technically ahead. This is misleading, as it is driven by the i7-4790 having a much larger set of PassMark results that skew its average upward. The head-to-head data, which is the more reliable comparison, shows the EPYC winning the vast majority of tests. The i7-4790’s single win in Geekbench single-core is its only claim to performance superiority.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two processors explains every benchmark result. The Intel Core i7-4790 is a Haswell architecture part from the Core i7 generation, built on Intel’s 22 nm process. It is a desktop chip with 4 cores and 8 threads, a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz. Its cache layout is modest by modern standards: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports dual-channel DDR3 memory with a bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s and has 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU. It also includes integrated Intel HD 4600 graphics, a feature absent on the AMD part.

The AMD EPYC 7502P, by contrast, is a Zen 2 architecture (codename Rome) server/workstation processor from the EPYC 7002 series. It is built on TSMC’s 7 nm process and is a massive 32-core, 64-thread part. Its base clock is 2.50 GHz, boosting to 3.35 GHz. The cache hierarchy is vastly larger: 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and a colossal 128 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports eight-channel DDR4 memory, providing a theoretical bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, and features PCIe Gen 4 connectivity. It also supports ECC memory, which the Intel part does not. The EPYC is a multi-die chiplet design with 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die size, while the Intel is a monolithic 1,400 million transistor design on a 177 mm² die.

These differences are not incremental; they are categorical. The EPYC’s eight-channel memory bus is a key reason for its massive Cinebench leads, as those workloads are heavily memory-bandwidth sensitive. The i7-4790’s dual-channel DDR3 bus is a bottleneck that no amount of clock speed can overcome. The EPYC’s 128 MB L3 cache also dwarfs the Intel’s 8 MB, reducing latency for large working sets. The process node advantage (7 nm vs 22 nm) allows for the massive core count within a reasonable power envelope, though the TDP of 180 W is still more than double the i7-4790’s 84 W.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 7502P is the clear winner for any workload that scales with cores and memory bandwidth. This includes all multi-core rendering, simulation, data processing, and virtualized server environments. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 43,395 versus 6,171 makes it the obvious choice for 3D rendering or video encoding. The 49.8% lead in Geekbench multi-core (7,822 vs 3,927) further confirms its dominance in general multi-threaded productivity. The EPYC is also the only option for memory-intensive tasks, given its 204.8 GB/s bandwidth versus the i7-4790’s 25.6 GB/s. Its support for ECC memory and PCIe Gen 4 also makes it the only viable choice for a modern server or workstation.

The Intel Core i7-4790 wins in exactly one scenario: single-threaded performance as measured by Geekbench. Its score of 1,164 beats the EPYC’s 963 by 20.9%. The data suggests that for applications that are strictly single-threaded and have not been optimized for multi-core, the i7-4790’s higher boost clock of 4.00 GHz (vs 3.35 GHz) can provide a tangible benefit. However, this advantage is narrow and isolated. In the Cinebench R23 single-core test, the EPYC still wins despite its lower clock, indicating that the Intel’s single-core advantage is not universal and is specific to the Geekbench workload. The i7-4790 also has the benefit of integrated graphics, which the EPYC lacks, making it a more self-contained solution for a basic desktop.

Outside of that single Geekbench test, there is no scenario where the i7-4790 is competitive. The PassMark data for the Intel part shows scores that are far below what the EPYC would be expected to achieve in similar tests, though direct comparisons are not available in the head-to-head data. The i7-4790’s 32 score in find prime numbers and 13,104 in floating point math are illustrative of its limitations in compute-heavy tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD EPYC 7502P is overwhelmingly faster, scoring 43,395 compared to the Intel Core i7-4790’s 6,171, representing a delta of -85.8% for the Intel part.

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-4790 win any benchmark?

A: Yes. The Intel Core i7-4790 wins the Geekbench single-core test with a score of 1,164, defeating the AMD EPYC 7502P’s 963 by a margin of 20.9%.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two?

A: The AMD EPYC 7502P supports eight-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. The Intel Core i7-4790 uses dual-channel DDR3 with a bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD EPYC 7502P supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i7-4790 does not.

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

A: The AMD EPYC 7502P has 32 cores and 64 threads. The Intel Core i7-4790 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each?

A: The Intel Core i7-4790 has an average benchmark score of 10,556, while the AMD EPYC 7502P has an average benchmark score of 10,512. The delta between them is 0.4%.

Specification Differences

The following table lists only the fields where the two processors differ, according to the data.

| Specification | Intel Core i7-4790 | AMD EPYC 7502P |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Series | null | EPYC 7002 series |

| Cores | 4 | 32 |

| Threads | 8 | 64 |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.00 GHz | 3.35 GHz |

| TDP | 84 W | 180 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1150 | AMD Socket SP3 |

| Architecture | Haswell | Zen 2 |

| Codename | Haswell | Rome |

| Generation | Core i7 (Haswell) | EPYC (Zen 2 (Rome)) |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 7 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | 1,400 million | 3,800 million |

| Die Size | 177 mm² | 74 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 128 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR3 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Eight-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 204.8 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | false | true |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4 |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 4600 | null |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2014-04-30 | 2019-08-06 |

| Launch MSRP | $312 | null |

| Part Number | SR1QF | 100-000000045 |

The Verdict

The choice between these two processors is not a difficult one based on the data. The AMD EPYC 7502P is the superior processor for virtually all workloads. It wins seven of eight head-to-head benchmarks, and its victories are by massive margins in every multi-threaded test. The data indicates it is the clear choice for any server, workstation, or high-performance computing task where rendering, simulation, or data processing is the primary function. Its 32 cores, 64 threads, 128 MB L3 cache, and 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth provide a level of performance that the i7-4790 cannot approach.

The Intel Core i7-4790 should only be considered if the sole requirement is maximum performance in the Geekbench single-core test. Its 20.9% win in that specific benchmark is a real, measurable advantage. However, this is a narrow niche. For a general-purpose desktop, the i7-4790’s integrated graphics and lower TDP make it a more practical legacy option, but its end-of-life status and lack of modern features like PCIe Gen 4 and ECC memory limit its utility. The verdict is unambiguous: the EPYC 7502P is the performance champion, and the i7-4790 is a legacy part with a single, isolated strength.