AMD EPYC 7502P vs Intel Core i7-6700 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits this pairing into two very different personalities. The Intel Core i7-6700 wins exactly one of the eight recorded head-to-head tests: Geekbench single-core, where it scores 1264 against the EPYC 7502P's 963, a 31.3% advantage. That result reflects a desktop-oriented design tuned for lightly threaded responsiveness. Every other recorded benchmark, seven in total, goes to the AMD EPYC 7502P.

The EPYC 7502P dominates in multi-threaded workloads by margins that are hard to overstate. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 43395 versus 6828, a delta of 84.3% in its favor. The same 84.3% delta appears across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core runs, except for Geekbench single-core. This is not a near-run contest; the EPYC part is in a different performance class for sustained parallel compute.

The use-case split is straightforward. For single-threaded applications that rely on high clock response and older x86 cores, the Core i7-6700 holds the edge in Geekbench's single-core measurement. For Cinebench rendering, which scales with core count, the EPYC 7502P's 32 cores and 64 threads produce scores roughly six times higher than the 4-core, 8-thread i7-6700. Server virtualization, database workloads, and content rendering all favor the AMD part. The Intel part remains relevant for legacy desktop tasks where single-thread latency matters more than throughput.

The average benchmark scores tell a similar story. The i7-6700 posts an average of 11074 across its full benchmark suite, while the EPYC 7502P averages 10512. This counterintuitive result happens because the Intel part has many more recorded PassMark tests, including single-thread and integer math tests where it performs relatively well. The EPYC part's recorded suite is limited to Cinebench and Geekbench, which are heavily multi-threaded. When comparing only the eight shared head-to-head tests, the EPYC wins seven, but the average score across all recorded data puts the Intel part slightly ahead due to test mix.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from opposite ends of the hardware spectrum. The Intel Core i7-6700 uses the Skylake architecture, built on Intel's 14 nm process at Intel's own foundry. It has 4 cores and 8 threads. The AMD EPYC 7502P uses the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Rome, fabricated by TSMC on a 7 nm process. It has 32 cores and 64 threads, an eightfold increase in core count.

Cache hierarchies diverge sharply. The i7-6700 provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The EPYC 7502P provides 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 128 MB of shared L3. The EPYC's L3 is 16 times larger, which matters for datasets that exceed the Intel part's entire cache. The EPYC also carries 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die, whereas the Intel part has no recorded transistor or die size data.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The i7-6700 supports DDR3 and DDR4 over a dual-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The EPYC 7502P supports only DDR4, but over an eight-channel bus, delivering 204.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth. That is six times the bandwidth of the Intel part. The EPYC also supports ECC memory; the i7-6700 does not. The PCIe interface differs as well: the i7-6700 provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the EPYC 7502P provides Gen 4 without a lane count listed.

Integrated graphics separate them further. The i7-6700 includes HD Graphics 530, making it a complete desktop solution without a discrete GPU. The EPYC 7502P has no integrated graphics, which is typical for a server/workstation part that assumes a dedicated GPU or management controller. The sockets are incompatible: Intel Socket 1151 for the i7-6700, AMD Socket SP3 for the EPYC. Market segments reflect this: the Intel part is listed as Desktop, the AMD part as Server/Workstation.

Production status differs too. The i7-6700 is end-of-life, released in 2015. The EPYC 7502P is active, released in 2019. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $303, while the EPYC part has no recorded launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The eight shared benchmarks reveal a consistent pattern with one notable exception. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i7-6700 scores 688 and the EPYC 7502P scores 4374, a delta of 84.3% in favor of AMD. Single-core R15 follows the same shape: 96 for Intel versus 617 for AMD, again 84.3%. The fact that single-core R15 also favors the EPYC is surprising given the Intel part's higher boost clock, but the recorded data is unambiguous.

Cinebench R20 repeats the pattern. Multi-core: 2867 for Intel, 18225 for AMD, 84.3% delta. Single-core: 404 for Intel, 2572 for AMD, 84.3% delta. Cinebench R23 continues it. Multi-core: 6828 for Intel, 43395 for AMD, 84.3% delta. Single-core: 964 for Intel, 6126 for AMD, 84.3% delta. Every Cinebench iteration, regardless of version or thread count, shows the same relative gap. The EPYC 7502P is not merely faster; it is faster by a fixed proportion across all Cinebench workloads.

Geekbench breaks the monotony. In Geekbench multi-core, the EPYC still wins: 7822 versus 4201, a 46.3% delta. But in Geekbench single-core, the i7-6700 takes the victory with 1264 versus 963, a 31.3% delta in Intel's favor. This is the only test where the older desktop chip beats the server processor. The Geekbench single-core test likely rewards the i7-6700's 4.00 GHz boost clock and lower thread overhead, while the EPYC's 3.35 GHz boost clock and larger core count do not help in a single-threaded workload.

The wins tally is 7 for the EPYC 7502P and 1 for the i7-6700. The delta percentages are large in both directions: 84.3% for the EPYC in Cinebench, 31.3% for the i7-6700 in Geekbench single-core. The EPYC's multi-core advantage is roughly two and a half times larger in percentage terms than the Intel part's single-core advantage.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-6700 | AMD EPYC 7502P |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 4 | 32 |

| Threads | 8 | 64 |

| Base clock | 3.40 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.00 GHz | 3.35 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 180 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1151 | AMD Socket SP3 |

| Architecture | Skylake | Zen 2 |

| Codename | Skylake | Rome |

| Process node | 14 nm | 7 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 3,800 million |

| Die size | Not recorded | 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 | DDR4 |

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Eight-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 34.1 GB/s | 204.8 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

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

| Integrated graphics | HD Graphics 530 | None |

| Market segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Production status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release date | 2015-06-30 | 2019-08-06 |

| Launch MSRP | $303 | Not recorded |

| Multiplier unlocked | No | No |

| Part number | SR2L2 | 100-000000045 |

The TDP difference is large: 65 W for Intel versus 180 W for AMD. That reflects the EPYC's 32 active cores and eight-channel memory controller. The clock speeds favor Intel in raw terms, with a 3.40 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost versus 2.50 GHz and 3.35 GHz for AMD, but the EPYC's core count overwhelms that clock deficit in multi-threaded tests. The i7-6700's dual-channel memory bus and 34.1 GB/s bandwidth are typical for a desktop part, while the EPYC's eight-channel bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth target server-class memory throughput.

The process node difference, 14 nm versus 7 nm, partly explains how AMD fits 32 cores into a 74 mm² die. Intel's 14 nm process for Skylake is older and less dense. The EPYC also has a larger L3 cache by a factor of 16, which reduces memory access latency for repeated workloads. The Intel part's integrated graphics are a notable differentiator for desktop use, while the EPYC's lack of them is standard for server parts.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in single-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Core i7-6700 wins Geekbench single-core with a score of 1264 versus 963 for the AMD EPYC 7502P, a 31.3% advantage. However, in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 single-core tests, the EPYC 7502P wins by 84.3% each time.

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

A: The EPYC 7502P scores 43395 versus 6828 for the i7-6700, a delta of 84.3% in favor of the AMD part. This is consistent across all three Cinebench versions tested.

Q: Does the i7-6700 support ECC memory?

A: No, the i7-6700 does not support ECC memory. The EPYC 7502P does support ECC, which is important for server and workstation reliability.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor provide?

A: The i7-6700 provides 34.1 GB/s over a dual-channel DDR3/DDR4 bus. The EPYC 7502P provides 204.8 GB/s over an eight-channel DDR4 bus.

Q: Are these processors socket-compatible?

A: No. The i7-6700 uses Intel Socket 1151, while the EPYC 7502P uses AMD Socket SP3. They cannot be installed in the same motherboard.

Q: What is the production status of each part?

A: The i7-6700 is end-of-life, released on 2015-06-30. The EPYC 7502P is active, released on 2019-08-06. The i7-6700 has a launch MSRP of $303; the EPYC 7502P has no recorded launch MSRP.