AMD EPYC 7551 vs Intel Core i5-13400E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded Cinebench results show a consistent, though narrow, advantage for the Intel Core i5-13400E across every test in the database. In the six head-to-head comparisons, the Intel part wins all six, with the AMD EPYC 7551 trailing by a margin of 3.9% in most disciplines. This uniformity is notable: whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded, the delta remains almost perfectly stable.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Intel Core i5-13400E scores 2313 against the EPYC 7551's 2227, a 3.9% lead. The single-core R15 result is nearly identical in percentage terms, 326 versus 314, a 3.8% edge. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core gap holds at 3.9% (9639 versus 9280), and the single-core test also shows 3.9% (1360 versus 1309). Cinebench R23 repeats the pattern: the Intel chip posts 22950 in multi-core and 3240 in single-core, while the AMD server processor manages 22096 and 3119 respectively, each a 3.9% difference.

The consistency of these deltas suggests the performance gap is not workload-specific but rather a fundamental throughput difference per unit of execution resource. The EPYC 7551 has more than three times the core count (32 versus 10) and four times the threads (64 versus 16), yet it cannot translate that raw parallelism into a win. The Intel part's higher clock speeds, 4.60 GHz boost versus 3.00 GHz boost, appear to compensate fully for the core deficit in these Cinebench workloads.

For context, the average benchmark score of the Intel Core i5-13400E is 6638, placing it in the 62nd percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X with an average score of 6647, a delta of -0.1%, essentially a tie. The EPYC 7551's average score is 6391, also in the 62nd percentile, with its closest rival being the Intel Core i9-10920X at 6347, a 0.7% advantage for the EPYC. These percentile rankings confirm that both processors occupy a similar overall performance tier despite their very different designs.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two parts is stark. The Intel Core i5-13400E is built on Raptor Lake, a 10 nm process from Intel's own foundry, with a die size of 215 mm². The AMD EPYC 7551 uses the Zen architecture, codenamed Naples, fabricated on a 14 nm process by GlobalFoundries, with a die size of 213 mm². The die sizes are nearly identical, but the transistor counts diverge sharply: the EPYC packs 4,800 million transistors, while the Intel part's transistor count is not recorded in the database.

Core and cache configurations differ dramatically. The Intel chip has 10 cores and 16 threads, with an L1 cache of 80 KB per core, an L2 cache of 1.25 MB per core, and a shared L3 cache of 20 MB. The AMD EPYC 7551 offers 32 cores and 64 threads, with a larger L1 of 96 KB per core, a smaller L2 of 512 KB per core, and a much larger shared L3 of 64 MB. The EPYC's total L3 is three times that of the Intel part, which matters for workloads with large working sets that fit in cache.

Memory architecture is another major differentiator. The Intel Core i5-13400E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, while the EPYC 7551 supports only DDR4 but across an eight-channel memory bus, providing a recorded memory bandwidth of 170.6 GB/s. The Intel part's memory bandwidth is not listed in the database, but the channel count difference is significant for memory-bound server workloads. Both processors support ECC memory, which is unusual for a desktop chip like the i5-13400E.

PCIe capabilities also differ. The Intel part offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the EPYC 7551 provides Gen 3 without a lane count specified in the records. The Intel chip includes integrated graphics in the form of UHD Graphics 730, whereas the EPYC has no integrated graphics at all, a common trait for server processors. The EPYC's multiplier is unlocked, while the Intel part's is not.

Release dates are far apart: the Intel Core i5-13400E launched on January 3, 2023, while the EPYC 7551 launched on June 28, 2017. The process node advantage (10 nm versus 14 nm) and the newer microarchitecture explain much of the Intel part's efficiency and clock speed advantage, despite the EPYC's enormous core count.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for general-purpose and single-threaded workloads: the Intel Core i5-13400E wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, with a 3.9% edge in all but one test. Its higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz versus 3.00 GHz, newer 10 nm process, and more modern Raptor Lake architecture deliver better performance per core, which is why it outperforms a processor with 22 additional cores and 48 additional threads.

For multi-threaded and server-class workloads, the AMD EPYC 7551's strengths are not visible in the Cinebench results, but its specifications suggest different use cases. The eight-channel memory bus with 170.6 GB/s of bandwidth, the 64 MB L3 cache, and the 32 cores / 64 threads are all designed for high-throughput server environments, not desktop benchmarks. The database records no benchmark where the EPYC wins, so strictly from the measured data, the Intel part is the faster processor in every tested scenario.

However, the EPYC 7551's market segment is Server/Workstation, while the Intel part targets Desktop. A buyer choosing between these two should consider the platform requirements: Socket 1700 for Intel versus Socket SP3 for AMD, plus the memory and PCIe differences. The Intel part is the better choice for desktop and workstation applications that rely on single-thread speed and modern platform features. The AMD part remains relevant only for server deployments that require massive core counts, high memory bandwidth, and ECC memory across many channels, though its benchmark scores do not reflect an advantage in the tested Cinebench workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-13400E boosts to 4.60 GHz, while the AMD EPYC 7551 boosts to 3.00 GHz.

Q: How many cores does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core i5-13400E has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD EPYC 7551 has 32 cores and 64 threads.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: Both processors support ECC memory according to the database.

Q: What memory bandwidth does the AMD EPYC 7551 provide?

A: The EPYC 7551 has an eight-channel memory bus with 170.6 GB/s of recorded bandwidth, supporting only DDR4.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-13400E include integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes UHD Graphics 730, while the AMD EPYC 7551 has no integrated graphics.

Q: Which processor is newer?

A: The Intel Core i5-13400E was released on January 3, 2023, while the AMD EPYC 7551 was released on June 28, 2017.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-13400E wins every benchmark in the database, so its strengths are easy to enumerate. It leads in single-core performance across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, with scores of 326, 1360, and 3240 respectively, versus the EPYC's 314, 1309, and 3119. It also leads in multi-core, scoring 2313 in R15, 9639 in R20, and 22950 in R23, against the EPYC's 2227, 9280, and 22096. The 3.9% delta in multi-core tests is surprising given the EPYC's 32 cores, but the Intel part's higher clocks and newer architecture make the difference.

The AMD EPYC 7551 has no benchmark wins, but its specification sheet points to hypothetical advantages outside the Cinebench suite. The eight-channel memory bus and 170.6 GB/s bandwidth are clearly superior for memory-intensive server tasks. The 64 MB shared L3 cache is three times larger than the Intel part's 20 MB, which could benefit workloads with large data sets that repeatedly access the same memory regions. The 32 cores and 64 threads provide more parallel execution capacity, even if the Cinebench results do not reflect it due to the lower 3.00 GHz boost clock and older Zen architecture.

For a workstation user running Cinebench-like rendering tasks, the Intel part is the clear pick. For a server administrator managing virtual machines or database workloads that rely on memory bandwidth and cache capacity, the EPYC's platform features might be more relevant, though the database provides no benchmark evidence to confirm this.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification field. The Intel Core i5-13400E uses the Intel Socket 1700, while the AMD EPYC 7551 uses AMD Socket SP3. The Intel part is built on a 10 nm process by Intel, whereas the EPYC uses a 14 nm process by GlobalFoundries. The EPYC has 32 cores and 64 threads, compared to the Intel part's 10 cores and 16 threads.

Clock speeds differ significantly: the Intel part has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost of 4.60 GHz, while the EPYC has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost of 3.00 GHz. The TDP also differs, with the Intel chip rated at 65 W and the EPYC at 180 W. Cache configurations are distinct: the Intel part has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 20 MB shared L3, while the EPYC has 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 64 MB shared L3.

Memory support varies: the Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode, while the EPYC supports only DDR4 in eight-channel mode with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth. PCIe generations differ, with the Intel part offering Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes and the EPYC offering Gen 3. The Intel part includes UHD Graphics 730 integrated graphics, while the EPYC has none. The EPYC's multiplier is unlocked, but the Intel part's is not. The Intel part's die size is 215 mm², and the EPYC's is 213 mm², with the EPYC's transistor count recorded at 4,800 million. The Intel part launched on January 3, 2023, and the EPYC on June 28, 2017.