AMD EPYC 7551P vs Intel Core i5-4590 Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7551P and Intel Core i5-4590 occupy completely different corners of the hardware world. One is a 32-core server behemoth built for virtualization and heavy throughput, the other a quad-core desktop chip from the Haswell era. The benchmark data makes the scale of that divide explicit, and the numbers tell a story of overwhelming multi-core dominance for the EPYC, alongside a single narrow victory for the older Intel part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the EPYC 7551P scores 3276 against the i5-4590's 460. That is a 612.2% advantage, a margin that reflects the eight-fold core count difference and the EPYC's support for 64 threads. The gap persists across every Cinebench iteration. In R20 multi-core, the EPYC's 13650 dwarfs the i5's 1920, a 610.9% lead. R23 multi-core shows the same pattern: 32500 versus 4573, a 610.7% difference. These are not incremental gains; they represent a different performance class entirely.

Single-core results in Cinebench are equally lopsided, which is the more surprising finding. The EPYC 7551P wins R15 single-core with 462 points against the i5-4590's 64, a 621.9% delta. This pattern repeats in R20 single-core (1926 vs 270, 613.3% ahead) and R23 single-core (4588 vs 645, 611.3% ahead). The EPYC's 2.00 GHz base clock is lower than the i5's 3.30 GHz, yet the Zen architecture's per-core efficiency and the 3.00 GHz boost clock still deliver a decisive win. The i5-4590's higher clock speed does not translate into a single-core Cinebench victory.

Geekbench offers a different picture. In Geekbench multi-core, the EPYC leads 6296 to 3156, a 99.5% advantage. This is substantial but far narrower than the Cinebench margins, suggesting the workload scaling properties differ between the two suites. The i5-4590 takes its only win in Geekbench single-core, scoring 1077 against the EPYC's 919, a -14.7% delta in favor of the Intel chip. This is the sole benchmark where the desktop part comes out ahead. It indicates that for lightly threaded tasks that favor raw clock speed and older, simpler instruction scheduling, the i5-4590 can still hold its own.

The benchmark tally is 7 wins for the EPYC 7551P and 1 for the i5-4590. The average benchmark scores reflect this overall dominance: the EPYC's average is 7952, placing it in the 64th percentile of all CPUs, while the i5-4590 averages 7609, sitting in the 63rd percentile. Despite the massive per-test deltas, their aggregate percentiles are close, which suggests the i5-4590 benefits from its Passmark results that are not part of the head-to-head comparison.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 7551P wins everywhere the workload can use more than four threads. Its 32 cores and 64 threads provide massive parallel throughput. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32500 indicates that rendering, video encoding, scientific simulation, and database workloads will see exceptional scaling. The eight-channel DDR4 memory bus with 170.6 GB/s of bandwidth further supports memory-intensive server tasks. For virtualization, where multiple VMs compete for resources, the core count alone makes the EPYC the clear choice. The 64 MB of shared L3 cache also helps keep frequently accessed data close to the cores.

The i5-4590 wins in Geekbench single-core, and that result points toward its niche. Legacy desktop applications that are not well-threaded, older games, and general office productivity will run fine on the Intel chip. Its 3.70 GHz boost clock gives it a responsiveness advantage in tasks that cannot utilize more than one or two cores. The integrated Intel HD 4600 graphics also means it can run a basic display output without a discrete GPU, which the EPYC cannot do. For a simple desktop build where cost and power draw are the primary constraints, the i5-4590's 84 W TDP is far easier to cool than the EPYC's 180 W.

The Passmark data for the i5-4590, though not part of the head-to-head, shows it handles integer math (15862), floating-point math (12057), and random string sorting (10238) at levels that are respectable for a quad-core desktop part. It scores 5373 in Passmark multithread and 2081 in single-thread. These results indicate that for everyday desktop workloads, the i5-4590 is a functional, if dated, processor.

The Verdict

From the data, the EPYC 7551P is the only choice for anyone needing heavy multi-core compute. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32500 is roughly 7.1 times the i5-4590's 4573. If a workload can saturate 32 cores, the EPYC will finish in a fraction of the time. The 64th percentile ranking places it near the Intel Core i7-13700E (average score 7957, deltaPct -0.1%) and ahead of the Intel Core i9-10980XE (7910, deltaPct 0.5%). It trails the Intel Xeon Gold 6326 (8071, deltaPct -1.5%) and Xeon Platinum 8180M (8110, deltaPct -1.9%). This puts it squarely in high-end server territory.

The i5-4590, with its 63rd percentile, sits near the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX (7578, deltaPct 0.4%) and the Intel Core i5-6500 (7569, deltaPct 0.5%). Its average score is comparable to these parts, but its performance profile is entirely different. The 4-core, 4-thread configuration is a hard limit. No amount of clock speed compensates for the lack of cores in threaded workloads.

Choose the EPYC 7551P for servers, rendering farms, or any compute-heavy infrastructure. Choose the i5-4590 only for a basic desktop where the single-core Geekbench win (1077 vs 919) matters more than everything else. The data shows no scenario where the i5-4590 competes on multi-core, and the EPYC's single-core Cinebench wins suggest the older chip is not even competitive in those tests. The i5-4590's sole advantage is its Geekbench single-core score, which is a narrow margin and may not translate to real-world application speed.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher Cinebench R23 multi-core score?

A: The AMD EPYC 7551P scores 32500, which is 610.7% higher than the Intel Core i5-4590's 4573.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-4590 win any benchmark against the EPYC 7551P?

A: Yes, the i5-4590 wins Geekbench single-core with a score of 1077, compared to the EPYC's 919, a delta of -14.7% in favor of the Intel chip.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each CPU?

A: The AMD EPYC 7551P has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the Intel Core i5-4590 has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The EPYC 7551P has an average benchmark score of 7952, placing it in the 64th percentile, while the i5-4590 averages 7609 and sits in the 63rd percentile.

Q: What memory types do these processors support?

A: The EPYC 7551P supports DDR4 memory with an eight-channel bus and 170.6 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the i5-4590 supports DDR3 memory with a dual-channel bus and no listed bandwidth figure.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-4590 have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes Intel HD 4600, while the EPYC 7551P has no integrated graphics.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs are built on different manufacturing processes and microarchitectures. The AMD EPYC 7551P is fabricated on a 14 nm node at GlobalFoundries, using the Zen architecture with the codename Naples. It integrates 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. The Intel Core i5-4590 is built on a 22 nm process at Intel, using the Haswell architecture. It contains 1,400 million transistors on a 177 mm² die. The process node difference of 14 nm versus 22 nm contributes to the EPYC's ability to pack 32 cores into a similar die area.

Cache hierarchies are also distinct. The EPYC allocates 96 KB of L1 cache and 512 KB of L2 cache per core, with a 64 MB shared L3 cache. The i5-4590 has 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, with a 6 MB shared L3 cache. The EPYC's 64 MB of L3 is over ten times larger, which is critical for server workloads with large working sets. The i5-4590's smaller cache reflects its desktop origins.

Memory support is a fundamental divide. The EPYC uses DDR4 with an eight-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 170.6 GB/s, plus ECC memory support. The i5-4590 uses DDR3 with a dual-channel bus and no ECC support. The EPYC's memory bandwidth is a server-grade feature that the Intel chip cannot approach. Both processors use PCIe Gen 3, but the EPYC is aimed at the server/workstation market segment with an AMD Socket SP3, while the i5-4590 is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1150.

The EPYC's multiplier is unlocked, whereas the i5-4590's is locked. The EPYC also has a higher TDP of 180 W, while the i5-4590 consumes 84 W. The release dates are 2017-06-28 for the EPYC and 2014-04-30 for the i5-4590, reflecting a three-year gap in design philosophy.

Specification Differences

The core count is the most obvious difference: 32 cores for the EPYC versus 4 for the i5-4590, with 64 threads versus 4. Base clocks are 2000.00 MHz for the EPYC and 3.30 GHz for the i5-4590. Boost clocks are 3.00 GHz and 3.70 GHz, respectively. The EPYC's TDP is 180 W, the i5-4590's is 84 W. Sockets differ: AMD Socket SP3 versus Intel Socket 1150.

The process nodes are 14 nm and 22 nm, with transistor counts of 4,800 million and 1,400 million. Die sizes are 213 mm² and 177 mm². The L1 cache is 96 KB per core versus 64 KB per core, and L2 is 512 KB per core versus 256 KB per core. The L3 cache is 64 MB shared versus 6 MB shared.

Memory support differs: DDR4 with eight channels versus DDR3 with dual channels. The EPYC has a memory bandwidth of 170.6 GB/s, while the i5-4590 has no listed bandwidth. ECC memory is supported on the EPYC but not the i5-4590. The i5-4590 has integrated Intel HD 4600 graphics, while the EPYC has none. Market segments are Server/Workstation for the EPYC and Desktop for the i5-4590. The EPYC's production status is Active, while the i5-4590's is not listed. The EPYC has an unlocked multiplier, the i5-4590 does not. Release dates are 2017-06-28 for the EPYC and 2014-04-30 for the i5-4590.