AMD EPYC 7542 vs Intel Core i7-4790K Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents an unusually one-sided comparison. Across every recorded test in the database, the AMD EPYC 7542 outperforms the Intel Core i7-4790K. The win count is 6 to 0 in favor of the EPYC part, and the margins are consistently large. This is not a close contest by any measure.

Starting with multi-core performance, the gap is enormous. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7542 scores 3886 while the i7-4790K scores 690, a difference of 82.2 percent in favor of the AMD processor. The same pattern appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the EPYC scores 16193 against 2879 for the Intel chip, again an 82.2 percent advantage. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows the EPYC at 38555 versus 6855 for the i7-4790K, maintaining that identical 82.2 percent margin. The consistency of this delta across all three Cinebench versions is striking, it suggests the performance ratio is stable regardless of the workload version.

Single-core results tell a similar story, though the absolute numbers are smaller. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the EPYC 7542 scores 548 against the i7-4790K's 97, an 82.3 percent advantage. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 2286 versus 406, an 82.2 percent gap. Cinebench R23 single-core records 5443 for the EPYC and 967 for the Intel, again 82.2 percent. The near-identical percentage across every test, single or multi-core, indicates that the EPYC 7542 holds a fundamental per-thread performance advantage that scales to all cores.

The i7-4790K does not win a single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. Its best relative showing is still a loss by more than four-fifths. The data does not reveal any workload category where the Intel processor closes the gap to a competitive range.

For context, the average benchmark scores place both processors in similar overall percentiles. The i7-4790K sits at the 67th percentile among all CPUs in the database, while the EPYC 7542 sits at the 66th percentile. Their average benchmark scores are 11745 and 11152 respectively. The nearest rivals for the i7-4790K include the Intel Core i7-1185G7 at an average score of 11697, just 0.4 percent lower, and the Intel Xeon Gold 6342 at 11574, 1.5 percent lower. The EPYC 7542's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 3500U at 11176, only 0.2 percent higher, and the Intel Core i3-1305U at 11200, 0.4 percent higher. These similarity clusters are noteworthy, the two chips land in different neighborhoods of the average score distribution despite the massive head-to-head deltas.

FAQ

Q: Does the AMD EPYC 7542 win every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: Yes. The EPYC 7542 wins all 6 recorded head-to-head tests, covering Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core modes. The Intel Core i7-4790K records zero wins.

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

A: The EPYC 7542 leads by 82.2 percent in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests. For example, the R23 multi-core score is 38555 for the EPYC versus 6855 for the i7-4790K.

Q: Is the single-core gap smaller than the multi-core gap?

A: No, the single-core gap is essentially identical. The EPYC leads by 82.3 percent in Cinebench R15 single-core and by 82.2 percent in R20 and R23 single-core. The consistent percentage across all tests indicates the per-thread advantage is uniform.

Q: How do their overall database percentiles compare?

A: The i7-4790K is at the 67th percentile among all CPUs, while the EPYC 7542 is at the 66th percentile. Despite the EPYC's overwhelming head-to-head wins, the two sit at nearly the same percentile when measured against the full CPU population.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each processor?

A: For the i7-4790K, the closest rivals are the Intel Core i7-1185G7 at 0.4 percent higher average score and the Intel Core i7-7700 at 1.4 percent lower. For the EPYC 7542, the AMD Ryzen 5 3500U is 0.2 percent higher and the AMD EPYC 9224 is 0.3 percent lower in average score.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7542 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i7-4790K does not support ECC memory according to the recorded specifications.

Where Each One Wins

The use-case split is straightforward based on the benchmark data. The AMD EPYC 7542 wins every recorded workload category, so any scenario that relies on the measured tests favors the EPYC. Rendering tasks, as represented by the Cinebench suite, are decisively in the EPYC's favor. The 38555 R23 multi-core score indicates strong performance for heavily threaded rendering workloads, while the i7-4790K's 6855 score leaves it far behind.

The single-core results also favor the EPYC, which matters for applications that depend on per-thread responsiveness. The EPYC's 5443 R23 single-core score versus 967 for the i7-4790K suggests the AMD part handles lightly threaded tasks with a substantial advantage, not just a modest one. This is unusual for a server-class processor, the EPYC 7542 does not sacrifice single-thread speed despite its 32-core design.

The i7-4790K has no benchmark wins to point toward. Its position in the database at the 67th percentile with an average score of 11745 is respectable in absolute terms, and its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-7700, which is only 1.4 percent higher in average score. But against the EPYC 7542 specifically, the data offers no category where the Intel chip comes out ahead.

For workloads that are not covered by the recorded tests, the data cannot make claims. The PassMark tests, including integer math, floating point math, data compression, and encryption, exist in the i7-4790K's benchmark list but have no corresponding EPYC entries in the head-to-head comparison. The analysis must stay within the recorded head-to-head tests, which are exclusively Cinebench variants.

Specification Differences

The specification sheet shows two processors from different eras and market segments. The Intel Core i7-4790K is a desktop part with 4 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD EPYC 7542 is a server and workstation processor with 32 cores and 64 threads. The core count difference is 28 cores and 56 threads, which explains much of the multi-core benchmark gap.

Clock speeds differ in an interesting way. The i7-4790K has a base clock of 4.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The EPYC 7542 has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 3.40 GHz. The Intel chip runs at higher clocks, yet it still loses single-core benchmarks by over 82 percent. This indicates that the EPYC's architectural efficiency and IPC advantage more than compensate for its lower clock speeds.

Thermal design power differs substantially. The i7-4790K is rated at 88 watts, while the EPYC 7542 is rated at 225 watts. The EPYC consumes more power, which is expected given its 32-core design, but the per-core efficiency is notable given its benchmark dominance.

Memory support is a major differentiator. The i7-4790K supports DDR3 memory with a dual-channel bus and 25.6 GB/s bandwidth. The EPYC 7542 supports DDR4 memory with an eight-channel bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. The memory bandwidth difference is eightfold, which has implications for memory-intensive server workloads. The EPYC also supports ECC memory, while the i7-4790K does not.

The socket and platform are entirely different. The Intel chip uses Socket 1150, while the EPYC uses Socket SP3. The i7-4790K has PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the EPYC has PCIe Gen 4. The EPYC has no integrated graphics, while the i7-4790K includes Intel HD 4600. The i7-4790K has an unlocked multiplier, while the EPYC 7542 does not.

The market segments also differ. The i7-4790K is a desktop processor that is end-of-life, while the EPYC 7542 is an active server and workstation part. The release dates are separated by over five years, with the i7-4790K released in April 2014 and the EPYC 7542 in August 2019. The launch MSRP of the i7-4790K was $350, while the EPYC 7542 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors spans two major design eras. The Intel Core i7-4790K uses the Haswell architecture, built on a 22 nm process by Intel. The AMD EPYC 7542 uses the Zen 2 architecture, built on a 7 nm process by TSMC. The process node difference, 22 nm versus 7 nm, is significant for transistor density and power efficiency.

Transistor counts reflect the generational leap. The i7-4790K contains 1,400 million transistors on a 177 mm² die. The EPYC 7542 contains 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. The EPYC packs nearly three times as many transistors into less than half the die area, a signal of the 7 nm process density advantage.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The i7-4790K has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC 7542 has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 128 MB of shared L3 cache. The L3 cache difference is 16-fold, which contributes to the EPYC's ability to handle large data sets without constant memory traffic.

The codenames tell part of the story. The i7-4790K is Haswell, while the EPYC 7542 is Rome. The EPYC belongs to the 7002 series and the Zen 2 generation. The Intel chip belongs to the Core i7 line from the Haswell generation. These are not iterative improvements but fundamentally different designs from different companies and different process generations.

The EPYC's 128 MB shared L3 cache is a defining architectural feature. It allows each of the 32 cores to access a large pool of cached data, which is critical for server workloads that exhibit data reuse. The i7-4790K's 8 MB L3 cache is adequate for a 4-core desktop processor but cannot compete with the EPYC's cache capacity. The L1 and L2 cache sizes per core are also larger on the EPYC, providing additional per-thread performance benefits.

The memory controller architecture also differs. The i7-4790K uses a dual-channel DDR3 controller, while the EPYC 7542 uses an eight-channel DDR4 controller. This is not just a capacity difference, it changes the memory bandwidth ceiling from 25.6 GB/s to 204.8 GB/s. Server workloads that stream data will benefit disproportionately from the EPYC's memory subsystem.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous. The AMD EPYC 7542 wins every recorded test against the Intel Core i7-4790K, with margins of 82.2 to 82.3 percent across all Cinebench variants. The i7-4790K does not win a single comparison in the head-to-head set.

For users running Cinebench-style rendering workloads, whether single-threaded or multi-threaded, the EPYC 7542 is the clear choice based on the data. Its 38555 R23 multi-core score and 5443 R23 single-core score leave the i7-4790K's 6855 and 967 scores far behind. The consistent 82.2 percent delta across every test suggests the EPYC's advantage is architectural and not workload-specific within the measured categories.

The i7-4790K still holds relevance in the broader database context. Its 67th percentile ranking and average score of 11745 place it near the Intel Core i7-7700 and Intel Core i7-1185G7, with deltas of 1.4 percent and 0.4 percent respectively. For desktop users comparing within its own generation, it remains competitive. But against the EPYC 7542, the data offers no path to victory.

The EPYC 7542, despite its lower 66th percentile ranking, is the dominant processor in this direct comparison. Its average score of 11152 is actually lower than the i7-4790K's 11745, which is a curious data point. The average benchmark score includes tests beyond the Cinebench suite, and the i7-4790K has PassMark results that may boost its average. But in the head-to-head Cinebench tests, the EPYC wins decisively.

Purchasers should choose based on the workload. For rendering and compute tasks represented by Cinebench, the EPYC 7542 is the data-backed winner. The i7-4790K's strengths, if any exist beyond the recorded tests, are not visible in this comparison. The EPYC's ECC memory support, eight-channel DDR4 bandwidth, and 128 MB L3 cache align with server and workstation needs. The i7-4790K's integrated graphics and unlocked multiplier suit a desktop audience, but the benchmarks do not favor it in any measured category. The verdict from the recorded data is clear: the EPYC 7542 wins this matchup outright.