AMD EPYC 7551 vs Intel Core i9-10920X Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7551 and Intel Core i9-10920X are separated by an average benchmark score of just 0.7%, with the EPYC 7551 scoring 6391 versus the i9-10920X’s 6347. This makes them effectively performance peers in aggregate, yet their underlying architectures target completely different market segments. The EPYC 7551 is a 32-core server processor built for massive parallel throughput, while the i9-10920X is a 12-core desktop part designed for high clock speeds. The data shows the EPYC 7551 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, but by margins of only 1.0% to 1.1% — a statistical tie in real-world terms. The verdict is clear: choose based on platform needs, not raw Cinebench numbers, because neither chip holds a meaningful advantage in these specific benchmarks.

The Verdict

The AMD EPYC 7551 is the pick for multi-threaded server workloads that can leverage its 32 cores and 64 threads, plus its eight-channel memory bus and ECC support. The Intel Core i9-10920X is the pick for desktop users who need a 12-core processor with a 4.80 GHz boost clock and a standard quad-channel memory setup, though benchmark results show it cannot outrun the EPYC in any Cinebench test. The average benchmark scores place both at the 62nd percentile of all CPUs, and the delta between them is a negligible 0.7% — the EPYC 7551 is the nominal leader, but the i9-10920X is within 1.6% of the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U and 1.9% of the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X, while the EPYC 7551 sits 1.2% behind the Intel Core i7-12800HE and 1.8% behind the Intel Xeon D-2796TE. For a buyer, the EPYC 7551’s 32-core count and server-grade features justify its choice for rack-mounted or workstation builds, whereas the i9-10920X’s desktop socket and higher boost clock make it more appropriate for enthusiast motherboards. Neither chip wins decisively in the benchmark data, so the differentiator is the platform: EPYC’s eight-channel memory and ECC versus the i9’s unlocked multiplier and desktop segment.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7551 wins every single head-to-head benchmark in the data, but the margins are razor-thin. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the EPYC scores 2227 against the i9’s 2203, a 1.1% lead. In Cinebench R20 multicore, the EPYC scores 9280 against 9181, again a 1.1% lead. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the EPYC scores 22096 against 21861, a 1.1% lead. The single-core tests are equally close: the EPYC wins R15 single-core 314 to 311 (1.0%), R20 single-core 1309 to 1296 (1.0%), and R23 single-core 3119 to 3086 (1.1%). This means the EPYC 7551 wins every benchmark, but the i9-10920X’s higher base clock of 3.50 GHz and boost of 4.80 GHz do not translate into a single-core advantage — the EPYC’s 3.00 GHz boost clock is enough to edge out the Intel part in all tests. The i9-10920X has no benchmark wins in the head-to-head data, so its only advantage lies in its specification sheet: a 12-core count that is lower but with a higher clock speed, and a quad-channel memory bus that is standard for desktop platforms. The EPYC wins all six Cinebench tests, making it the clear benchmark leader, but its victories are so narrow that the i9-10920X remains competitive for any workload that does not scale perfectly across 64 threads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD EPYC 7551 uses the Zen architecture on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, with a codename of Naples and a 213 mm² die size containing 4,800 million transistors. It houses 32 cores and 64 threads with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.00 GHz, drawing 180 W TDP on the AMD Socket SP3 platform. The Intel Core i9-10920X uses the Cascade Lake architecture on a 14 nm process from Intel, with a codename of Cascade Lake-X, and no transistor or die size data is available. It houses 12 cores and 24 threads with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, drawing 165 W TDP on the Intel Socket 2066 platform. The cache layouts differ significantly: the EPYC has 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and a massive 64 MB shared L3 cache, while the i9 has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and a smaller 19.25 MB shared L3 cache. Memory support also diverges: the EPYC uses an eight-channel DDR4 bus with a rated bandwidth of 170.6 GB/s and supports ECC memory, whereas the i9 uses a quad-channel DDR4 bus with no listed bandwidth and does not support ECC. Both are unlocked for overclocking and use PCIe Gen 3, but the EPYC targets the server/workstation segment while the i9 targets desktop. The EPYC’s 64 MB L3 cache is more than three times the i9’s 19.25 MB, which explains how a 32-core part with lower clocks can match a 12-core part with higher clocks in Cinebench.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7551 has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the Intel Core i9-10920X has 12 cores and 24 threads. This is a 20-core and 40-thread difference in favor of the EPYC.

Q: Does the higher clock speed of the Intel Core i9-10920X help it win any benchmarks?

A: No. Despite a boost clock of 4.80 GHz versus the EPYC’s 3.00 GHz, the i9-10920X loses all six Cinebench tests, including single-core tests, by margins of 1.0% to 1.1%.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The EPYC 7551 uses an eight-channel DDR4 memory bus with a bandwidth of 170.6 GB/s and supports ECC, while the i9-10920X uses a quad-channel DDR4 bus with no listed bandwidth and no ECC support.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: Yes, both the EPYC 7551 and the i9-10920X have an unlocked multiplier, allowing for overclocking on their respective platforms.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The EPYC 7551 has an average benchmark score of 6391, which is 0.7% higher than the i9-10920X’s 6347. Both are at the 62nd percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The EPYC 7551 has 64 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i9-10920X has 19.25 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC’s cache is over three times larger.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clean sweep for the AMD EPYC 7551, but every victory is measured in single-digit percentage points. The largest margin is 1.1%, seen in Cinebench R15 multicore (2227 vs 2203), R20 multicore (9280 vs 9181), R23 multicore (22096 vs 21861), and R23 single-core (3119 vs 3086). The smallest margin is 1.0%, seen in R15 single-core (314 vs 311) and R20 single-core (1309 vs 1296). These results are remarkably consistent: the EPYC leads by roughly the same amount across all six tests, regardless of whether the test is single-threaded or multi-threaded. This suggests the EPYC’s advantage comes not from its 32-core count, but from architectural efficiency — the Zen core design achieves higher IPC or better memory latency than Cascade Lake in these specific workloads. The i9-10920X’s 4.80 GHz boost clock is 60% higher than the EPYC’s 3.00 GHz, yet it still loses single-core tests, meaning the EPYC’s per-core performance at lower clocks is superior. In the nearest rivals data, the EPYC’s 6391 average score is 0.7% ahead of the i9’s 6347, which itself is 1.6% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U and 1.9% ahead of the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X. The i9’s average also trails the Intel Core i7-12800HE by 1.9%, while the EPYC trails the same chip by 1.2%. The head-to-head sweep is decisive in name but negligible in magnitude; the EPYC wins all six tests, but the i9 is never more than 1.1% behind.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal two distinct platforms. The EPYC 7551 is a 32-core, 64-thread processor from the EPYC 7001 series, built on the Zen architecture and codenamed Naples, with a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, a 213 mm² die size, and 4,800 million transistors. The i9-10920X is a 12-core, 24-thread processor from the Core 10th Gen series, built on the Cascade Lake architecture and codenamed Cascade Lake-X, with a 14 nm process from Intel, and no transistor or die size data available. Clock speeds differ: the EPYC runs at 2.00 GHz base and 3.00 GHz boost, while the i9 runs at 3.50 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. TDP also differs, with the EPYC at 180 W and the i9 at 165 W. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3, while the i9 uses Intel Socket 2066. Cache configurations diverge: the EPYC has 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 64 MB shared L3; the i9 has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 19.25 MB shared L3. Memory support is a major differentiator: the EPYC has an eight-channel DDR4 bus with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support, while the i9 has a quad-channel DDR4 bus with no listed bandwidth and no ECC support. The EPYC is a server/workstation part, while the i9 is a desktop part. Both use PCIe Gen 3, both have unlocked multipliers, and both are listed as active in production. The EPYC was released on 2017-06-28, while the i9 was released on 2019-10-18. Neither has a launch MSRP listed. The EPYC’s part number is PS7551BDVIHAF, while the i9 has no part number listed. The i9 has additional Geekbench scores (11165 multicore, 1673 singlecore) that the EPYC lacks, but the EPYC’s Cinebench scores are uniformly higher.