AMD EPYC 7551P vs Intel Core i7-1065G7 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: AMD EPYC 7551P wins every recorded head-to-head comparison against Intel Core i7-1065G7. Across six Cinebench tests, the EPYC holds a commanding lead, with the Intel part trailing by roughly 78.9% in nearly every metric.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 7551P scores 32500 versus the i7-1065G7's 6866, a gap of 78.9%. The single-core R23 result tells a similar story: 4588 for the EPYC against 969 for the Intel, again a 78.9% deficit. These are not marginal differences; they represent a fundamentally different performance class.

Cinebench R20 repeats the pattern. Multi-core shows 13650 for the EPYC versus 2883 for the Intel, while single-core shows 1926 versus 406. Both results carry the same 78.9% delta. Cinebench R15 follows suit: multi-core 3276 versus 691, single-core 462 versus 97, with deltas of 78.9% and 79% respectively.

The Intel i7-1065G7 records zero wins in the head-to-head set. The EPYC 7551P wins all six. The consistency of the 78.9% delta across every Cinebench version suggests a structural advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk. Even in single-threaded tests, where the Intel's 3.90 GHz boost clock would normally matter, the EPYC's 3.00 GHz ceiling still produces a 79% higher score. That outcome indicates the EPYC's architecture extracts far more work per clock cycle in these rendering workloads.

The average benchmark scores in the database reinforce this divide. The Intel chip posts an average score of 8293, while the EPYC sits at 7952. Despite the EPYC's lower average, it wins every direct comparison. The Intel's average is buoyed by a broad set of lightweight mobile benchmarks, whereas the EPYC's recorded tests are exclusively Cinebench and Geekbench workloads, which favor its massive core count.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent opposite ends of the design spectrum. The Intel Core i7-1065G7 is a 4-core, 8-thread mobile part built on Ice Lake-U, using Intel's 10 nm process with a 123 mm² die. The AMD EPYC 7551P is a 32-core, 64-thread server processor from the EPYC 7001 series, built on Zen (Naples) architecture using GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process with a 213 mm² die and 4,800 million transistors.

Core and cache configurations diverge sharply. The Intel chip provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The EPYC offers 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3. The EPYC's L3 is eight times larger, a critical factor for server workloads with large working sets.

Clock speeds favor the Intel part on paper. The i7-1065G7 has a 1300 MHz base clock and 3900 MHz boost, while the EPYC runs at 2000 MHz base and 3000 MHz boost. Yet the EPYC wins even single-threaded tests, meaning its per-core efficiency in Cinebench exceeds the Intel's higher clocked cores.

Memory subsystems differ even more dramatically. The Intel uses dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support. The EPYC uses eight-channel DDR4 with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support. That 3.3x memory bandwidth advantage matters for data-intensive server tasks.

Both use PCIe Gen 3, but the platform context differs. The Intel chip has integrated Iris Plus graphics and targets mobile systems on Intel BGA 1526. The EPYC has no integrated graphics and uses AMD Socket SP3 in server platforms. The EPYC's multiplier is unlocked, while the Intel's is not. The Intel part launched on 2019-07-31; the EPYC on 2017-06-28. Both remain in active production.

Where Each One Wins

Given the head-to-head sweep, the EPYC 7551P wins every recorded comparison in Cinebench. For multi-threaded rendering, the EPYC's 32 cores and 64 threads produce 32500 in R23 multi-core, a score the Intel cannot approach. For single-threaded rendering, the EPYC still leads with 4588 versus 969, which is surprising given the Intel's higher boost clock.

The Intel i7-1065G7's strengths lie outside the tested head-to-head set. Its benchmark suite includes 3DMark tests, Passmark integer and floating point math, data compression, encryption, and physics simulations. The database shows the Intel reaching 2410 in 3DMark max threads, 28660 in Passmark integer math, and 16603 in floating point math. These are not compared directly to the EPYC, but they indicate the Intel's mobile-oriented capabilities.

Use-case splitting follows the data cleanly. Server and workstation workloads, particularly rendering and multi-threaded compute, belong to the EPYC. Its 64 MB L3 cache, eight-channel memory, and ECC support make it suitable for long-running, reliability-sensitive tasks. The Intel part fits mobile and light-duty scenarios where its 15 W TDP and integrated graphics matter more than raw throughput.

The EPYC's 180 W TDP versus the Intel's 15 W TDP underscores the trade-off. The EPYC consumes far more power but delivers far more work. The Intel is designed for battery-powered systems; the EPYC for socketed servers with ample cooling.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most benchmarks?

A: The AMD EPYC 7551P wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests. The Intel Core i7-1065G7 wins none.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 32500 versus the Intel's 6866, a 78.9% difference. Similar gaps appear in R15 and R20.

Q: Does the Intel chip win in single-threaded performance?

A: No. Despite a 3.90 GHz boost clock versus the EPYC's 3.00 GHz, the EPYC wins every single-threaded Cinebench test. In R23 single-core, the EPYC scores 4588 versus 969.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The Intel has 4 cores and 8 threads. The EPYC has 32 cores and 64 threads.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The EPYC 7551P supports ECC memory; the Intel Core i7-1065G7 does not.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each support?

A: The Intel supports dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s. The EPYC supports eight-channel DDR4 with 170.6 GB/s.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: the AMD EPYC 7551P is the superior processor for any workload represented in the head-to-head benchmarks. It wins every Cinebench test by roughly 78.9%, and its architectural advantages, 32 cores, 64 MB L3 cache, eight-channel memory, and ECC support, make it the appropriate choice for server and workstation tasks.

The Intel Core i7-1065G7 is not without merit, but its merits lie outside the head-to-head set. It offers integrated Iris Plus graphics, a 15 W TDP, and a mobile socket. For users needing a low-power processor in a laptop or compact system, it remains a valid option. For anyone comparing raw rendering performance, the EPYC dominates without exception.

The average benchmark scores tell a nuanced story. The Intel posts a higher average score of 8293 versus the EPYC's 7952, yet the EPYC wins every direct comparison. This apparent contradiction stems from the different benchmark mixes. The Intel's suite includes many lightweight mobile tests; the EPYC's recorded tests are all heavy compute workloads.

The verdict is straightforward. Choose the EPYC 7551P for multi-threaded rendering, server duties, or any task where core count and memory bandwidth matter. Choose the Intel i7-1065G7 for mobile systems where power draw, integrated graphics, and compact packaging take priority. The EPYC's 78.9% lead in every head-to-head test leaves no room for ambiguity in compute-bound scenarios.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core i7-1065G7 | AMD EPYC 7551P |

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

| Cores | 4 | 32 |

| Threads | 8 | 64 |

| Base clock | 1300 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Boost clock | 3900 MHz | 3000 MHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 180 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1526 | AMD Socket SP3 |

| Architecture | Ice Lake | Zen |

| Codename | Ice Lake-U | Naples |

| Generation | Core i7 (Sunny Cove-U) | EPYC (Zen (Naples)) |

| Process node | 10 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| Die size | 123 mm² | 213 mm² |

| Transistors | not specified | 4,800 million |

| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

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

| L3 cache | 8 MB (shared) | 64 MB (shared) |

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

| Memory bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 170.6 GB/s |

| ECC memory | false | true |

| Integrated graphics | Iris Plus | none |

| Market segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Multiplier unlocked | false | true |

| Release date | 2019-07-31 | 2017-06-28 |

| Part number | SRG0N | PS755PBDVIHAF |