AMD EPYC 7551 vs Intel Core i9-7960X Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7551 has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the Intel Core i9-7960X has 16 cores and 32 threads. The EPYC 7551 offers double the core and thread count.

Q: What are the maximum boost clock speeds?

A: The Intel Core i9-7960X boosts up to 4.40 GHz, while the AMD EPYC 7551 boosts up to 3.00 GHz. The Intel part has a significantly higher boost ceiling.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i9-7960X wins every single-core benchmark in the head-to-head data. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 3305 versus 3119 for the EPYC 7551, a 6% advantage.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7551 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i9-7960X does not. This makes the EPYC part better suited for server and workstation reliability requirements.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD EPYC 7551 has an eight-channel memory bus with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core i9-7960X has a quad-channel bus with 85.3 GB/s bandwidth. The EPYC part provides exactly double the memory bandwidth.

Q: Which CPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i9-7960X has an average benchmark score of 6533, while the AMD EPYC 7551 averages 6391. Despite having fewer cores, the Intel part edges ahead in the overall average.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear split between these two processors. The Intel Core i9-7960X wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with margins ranging from 5.9% to 6.1%. Its advantage is consistent across both single-core and multi-core workloads. The Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 2359 versus 2227, and the R23 single-core score of 3305 versus 3119, show that the Intel part delivers higher performance per core and also higher total throughput in these specific tests.

The AMD EPYC 7551, despite losing every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, offers a different value proposition based on its specifications. It has double the core count, double the memory bandwidth, and supports ECC memory. The EPYC 7551 is an active production part designed for the server and workstation segment, while the Intel i9-7960X is end-of-life desktop silicon. Users who need maximum memory throughput, ECC support, and a higher core count for heavily threaded server workloads should consider the EPYC 7551. Users who prioritize raw benchmark performance, higher clock speeds, and a desktop platform should choose the Intel Core i9-7960X.

The percentile data places both processors at the 62nd percentile versus all CPUs in the database, indicating they are considered comparable overall. However, the average benchmark score tells a slightly different story: the Intel part scores 6533, which is 2.2% higher than the EPYC's 6391. The Intel part's nearest rivals include the Xeon W-2191B with a delta of 0%, meaning they perform essentially identically. The EPYC 7551's closest rival is the Core i9-10920X, which trails by 0.7%. The data suggests the Intel i9-7960X is the better choice for benchmark-driven buyers, while the EPYC 7551 is the better choice for those who need its specific server-oriented features.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i9-7960X sweeps the head-to-head comparisons across all six Cinebench tests. The largest margin comes in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Intel part scores 333 against 314 for the EPYC 7551, a 6.1% lead. The R15 multi-core test shows a 5.9% advantage, with the Intel part scoring 2359 versus 2227. These results indicate that the Intel architecture delivers better performance in both lightly threaded and heavily threaded workloads within the Cinebench suite.

In Cinebench R20, the pattern continues. The Intel Core i9-7960X scores 9833 in multi-core, 6% ahead of the EPYC 7551's 9280. The single-core test shows the same 6% margin, with 1388 versus 1309. The consistency of these deltas across different Cinebench versions suggests a stable performance difference tied to architectural efficiency rather than workload-specific quirks.

Cinebench R23 results mirror the earlier versions. The Intel part scores 23413 in multi-core, 6% ahead of the EPYC 7551's 22096. In single-core, the Intel part scores 3305 versus 3119, again a 6% lead. Notably, the EPYC 7551 has no Geekbench results in the database, so the head-to-head comparison is limited to Cinebench tests. The Intel part also has Geekbench scores of 10307 multi-core and 1324 single-core, but there is no corresponding EPYC data to compare.

The fact that the Intel Core i9-7960X wins all six head-to-head tests with margins between 5.9% and 6.1% is significant. The EPYC 7551 has twice the core count, yet still trails in multi-core Cinebench tests. This indicates that the Intel Skylake-X architecture extracts more useful work per core in these rendering workloads. The EPYC 7551's lower clock speeds, with a base of 2000.00 MHz and boost of 3.00 GHz, likely contribute to its deficit against the Intel part's 2.80 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ substantially across nearly every specification category. The Intel Core i9-7960X has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the AMD EPYC 7551 has 32 cores and 64 threads. This is the most fundamental difference: the EPYC part offers exactly double the parallel processing capacity on paper.

Clock speeds diverge significantly. The Intel part has a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The AMD part has a base clock of 2000.00 MHz and a boost clock of 3.00 GHz. The Intel part's boost clock is 1.40 GHz higher, which explains its single-core performance advantage.

Thermal design power also differs. The Intel Core i9-7960X has a TDP of 165 watts, while the AMD EPYC 7551 has a TDP of 180 watts. Despite having fewer cores, the Intel part is rated for lower power consumption.

Memory support shows a major divergence. The Intel part uses quad-channel DDR4 with 85.3 GB/s bandwidth and does not support ECC memory. The AMD part uses eight-channel DDR4 with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth and supports ECC memory. The EPYC 7551 provides double the memory channels and double the bandwidth.

PCIe capabilities differ as well. The Intel Core i9-7960X offers Gen 3 with 44 lanes from the CPU. The AMD EPYC 7551 offers Gen 3, but the database does not list a specific lane count. The Intel part's 44 lanes are notable for a desktop platform.

Platform and socket are completely different. The Intel part uses Socket 2066, while the AMD part uses Socket SP3. The Intel part is a desktop segment product that is end-of-life, while the AMD part is a server/workstation product that is still active.

Manufacturing details also differ. Both use a 14 nm process, but the Intel part is fabricated by Intel with a die size of 484 mm², while the AMD part is fabricated by GlobalFoundries with a die size of 213 mm². The AMD part has 4,800 million transistors, while the Intel part does not have a listed transistor count.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two processors is fundamental. The Intel Core i9-7960X uses the Skylake architecture with the Skylake-X codename, belonging to the Core i9 X-Series 7th Generation. The AMD EPYC 7551 uses the Zen architecture with the Naples codename, belonging to the EPYC 7001 series.

Cache structures are organized very differently. The Intel part has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 22 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part has a much larger L3 pool, which is typical for server processors designed to handle large datasets. The Intel part has larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, which benefits single-threaded performance.

The process node is the same at 14 nm, but the foundry differs. Intel fabricates its own chip, while GlobalFoundries fabricates the AMD part. The die sizes are remarkably different: 484 mm² for the Intel part versus 213 mm² for the AMD part. This means the Intel chip uses a much larger silicon area, while the AMD chip packs 32 cores into a smaller die with 4,800 million transistors.

The core count disparity is rooted in architectural philosophy. The Intel Skylake-X design uses fewer, higher-clocked cores with more cache per core. The AMD Zen design uses more cores at lower clocks with a larger shared L3 cache. The EPYC 7551's 64 MB of shared L3 cache is nearly three times the Intel part's 22 MB, reflecting its server-oriented design for workloads that benefit from large shared pools of data.

Memory architecture also reflects different design goals. The Intel part's quad-channel bus and lack of ECC support are typical for desktop high-end computing. The AMD part's eight-channel bus with ECC support is designed for servers where memory reliability and bandwidth are critical. The EPYC 7551 also has an unlocked multiplier, as does the Intel part, but the AMD part's server positioning means it is more likely to run at stock settings.

Both processors support DDR4 memory and have no integrated graphics. The Intel part is end-of-life, while the AMD part remains active in production. The Intel part was released on 2017-08-31, while the AMD part was released on 2017-06-28, making the AMD chip slightly older in release date but still current in production status.