AMD EPYC 7543 vs Intel Core i7-10850H Comparison

The Intel Core i7-10850H and AMD EPYC 7543 come from different market segments: a 6-core mobile part in Intel's Comet Lake-H generation versus a 32-core server part in AMD's Zen 3 (Milan) generation. In the shared Cinebench tests, the EPYC wins all six, and by the same 81.7% margin. The head-to-head table records six wins for the EPYC and zero for the Core i7.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head set contains six Cinebench tests. In every one, the EPYC 7543 posts a higher score, and the Core i7-10850H trails by 81.7%. The uniformity of that gap is the most striking pattern in the data. The EPYC is not merely ahead in multi-core tests; it is also ahead in single-core tests, despite the Core i7's higher boost clock of 5.10 GHz versus 3.70 GHz.

Cinebench R15 multi-core shows the EPYC at 5393 against 986 for the Core i7. R15 single-core shows 761 against 139. In R20 multi-core, the EPYC scores 22473 and the Core i7 scores 4110. R20 single-core is 3172 versus 580. The largest recorded scores are in R23: multi-core 53509 versus 9786, and single-core 7554 versus 1381. Every one of those six comparisons carries the same relative result, a Core i7 deficit of 81.7%.

The aggregate database metrics complicate the picture. The Core i7 sits at the 70th percentile of all CPUs and has an average benchmark score of 16,204. The EPYC sits at the 69th percentile and has an average benchmark score of 15,477. That seems odd after a full sweep, but the test lists explain it: the Core i7 record includes PassMark tests, while the EPYC record contains only Cinebench results. The averages are not drawn from identical workloads.

The nearest rival comparisons also place each processor in a different cluster. The Core i7's average benchmark score is 0.2% behind the Core i5-10600KF, 0.3% ahead of the Core 3 100U, 0.7% behind the Core i7-1260U, and 0.8% behind the Ryzen 5 4600H. The EPYC's average is 0.7% ahead of the Core 5 211TE, 1.3% behind the Ryzen 3 7440U, 1.7% behind the Core i5-11400H, and 1.8% behind the EPYC 9254. These are narrow aggregate gaps, but the shared Cinebench results are not narrow: they are a clean sweep.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the shared Cinebench tests?

A: The AMD EPYC 7543 wins all six. The Core i7-10850H records no wins in the head-to-head set. The margins are identical at 81.7%: R15 multi-core 5393 versus 986, R15 single-core 761 versus 139, R20 multi-core 22473 versus 4110, R20 single-core 3172 versus 580, R23 multi-core 53509 versus 9786, and R23 single-core 7554 versus 1381.

Q: Does the Core i7's higher boost clock give it a single-core advantage?

A: No. The Core i7 boosts to 5.10 GHz, while the EPYC boosts to 3.70 GHz. Despite that, the EPYC wins all three single-core Cinebench tests by the same 81.7% gap: R15 single-core 761 to 139, R20 single-core 3172 to 580, and R23 single-core 7554 to 1381.

Q: How do the core, thread, and cache counts compare?

A: The Core i7 has 6 cores and 12 threads, with 256 KB L2 per core and 12 MB shared L3. The EPYC has 32 cores and 64 threads, with 512 KB L2 per core and 256 MB shared L3. Both use 64 KB L1 per core.

Q: Which processor supports ECC and more memory bandwidth?

A: The EPYC supports ECC memory, uses eight-channel memory, and has 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Core i7 does not support ECC, uses dual-channel memory, and has 46.9 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What do the aggregate database metrics show?

A: The Core i7 sits at the 70th percentile versus all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 16,204. The EPYC sits at the 69th percentile with an average benchmark score of 15,477. The Core i7 record includes PassMark entries, while the EPYC record only lists Cinebench results, so the aggregate numbers are not directly comparable.

Q: How do their nearest rival comparisons look?

A: The Core i7 average is 0.2% behind the Core i5-10600KF, 0.3% ahead of the Core 3 100U, 0.7% behind the Core i7-1260U, and 0.8% behind the Ryzen 5 4600H. The EPYC average is 0.7% ahead of the Core 5 211TE, 1.3% behind the Ryzen 3 7440U, 1.7% behind the Core i5-11400H, and 1.8% behind the EPYC 9254.

Where Each One Wins

Every shared benchmark win belongs to the EPYC 7543. The head-to-head table records six wins for the EPYC and zero for the Core i7. That makes the EPYC the stronger part for any workload represented by Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, in both single-core and multi-core forms.

The Core i7 has no benchmark wins in this comparison. Its usable strengths are platform-level: a 45W TDP, 5.10 GHz boost clock, integrated UHD Graphics, and the Intel BGA 1440 mobile socket. Those attributes do not appear in the head-to-head benchmark table, but they define the mobile use case. The EPYC's 225W TDP, Socket SP3, and absence of integrated graphics place it in server and workstation territory. The data therefore splits by workload class: for the shared Cinebench tests, the EPYC is the stronger part; for a mobile platform with built-in graphics, the Core i7 is the only one of the pair that fits.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two records.

| Field | Intel Core i7-10850H | AMD EPYC 7543 |

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

| Cores | 6 | 32 |

| Threads | 12 | 64 |

| Base clock | 2.70 GHz | 2.80 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.10 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 225 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1440 | AMD Socket SP3 |

| Architecture | Comet Lake | Zen 3 |

| Codename | Comet Lake-H | Milan |

| Generation | Core i7 (Comet Lake-H) | EPYC (Zen 3 (Milan)) |

| Process node | 14 nm | 7 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 33,200 million |

| Die size | Not recorded | 8x 81 mm² |

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

| L3 cache | 12 MB (shared) | 256 MB (shared) |

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

| Memory bandwidth | 46.9 GB/s | 204.8 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 128 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics | None |

| Market segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Release date | 2020-04-01 | 2021-03-14 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $3761 |

Architecture Differences

The architecture records explain why the benchmarks line up as they do. The Core i7 uses Intel's Comet Lake-H design on a 14nm process built by Intel. The EPYC uses AMD's Zen 3 (Milan) design on a 7nm process built by TSMC. The EPYC package data lists 33,200 million transistors and an 8x 81 mm² die size, while the Core i7 record has no transistor or die size entry.

Core count and cache hierarchy follow the architecture split. The Core i7 has 6 cores and 12 threads, with 256 KB L2 per core and 12 MB shared L3. The EPYC has 32 cores and 64 threads, with 512 KB L2 per core and 256 MB shared L3. L1 cache is the same on both at 64 KB per core.

Memory and I/O features reinforce the server role of the EPYC. It uses eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support, plus PCIe Gen 4 with 128 CPU lanes. The Core i7 uses dual-channel DDR4 with 46.9 GB/s bandwidth, no ECC, and PCIe Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes. The Core i7 integrates UHD Graphics, while the EPYC has no integrated graphics.

The Verdict

The recorded data gives the AMD EPYC 7543 a clean sweep of the shared Cinebench suite. It wins all six tests, and the Core i7 trails by 81.7% in every one. The EPYC also carries the server-class features: 32 cores, 64 threads, 256 MB L3, eight-channel memory, ECC, and 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes.

The Core i7's record contains no head-to-head benchmark wins. Its advantages are the mobile platform characteristics: 45W TDP, 5.10 GHz boost clock, integrated UHD Graphics, and Intel BGA 1440 socket. The Core i7 does have a higher percentile versus all CPUs, 70 against 69, and a higher average benchmark score, 16,204 against 15,477. Those metrics come from different test sets and do not offset the head-to-head sweep.

The data points to the EPYC for workloads that resemble Cinebench and for server or workstation environments. The Core i7 is the part for mobile systems with integrated graphics and lower power draw.