AMD EPYC 7551P vs Intel Core i7-13700E Comparison

The Intel Core i7-13700E and AMD EPYC 7551P deliver nearly identical average benchmark scores, but they achieve parity through radically different strengths. The EPYC 7551P dominates in Cinebench rendering tests, winning all six head-to-head matchups with a consistent 14% advantage, while the Core i7-13700E posts decisive victories in Geekbench workloads. With average scores of 7957 and 7952 respectively, the data shows a near-perfect tie overall, yet the benchmark-specific splits reveal two processors with opposite performance profiles.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD EPYC 7551P is the clear winner in Cinebench workloads, taking all six tests with a uniform margin of approximately 14%. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 32500 against the Intel’s 27941—a gap of 14% that reflects the EPYC’s higher core count. The same margin appears in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the EPYC’s 4588 score beats the Intel’s 3944. This pattern repeats across R15 and R20 variants: multi-core results show the EPYC ahead at 3276 vs 2816 (R15) and 13650 vs 11735 (R20), while single-core results show 462 vs 397 and 1926 vs 1656. In every Cinebench test, the EPYC’s deltaPct sits at exactly -14 or -14.1, indicating a consistent performance advantage regardless of rendering complexity.

The Intel Core i7-13700E turns the tables completely in Geekbench. In Geekbench multi-core, the Intel scores 12728 versus the EPYC’s 6296, a staggering 102.2% advantage—more than double the AMD’s output. The single-core Geekbench test is even more lopsided: Intel at 2437 versus EPYC at 919, a 165.2% delta. These are not marginal wins; they represent fundamental differences in how each processor handles the Geekbench workload. The Intel’s massive single-core lead in this test is particularly notable, as it suggests superior per-thread efficiency that the Cinebench results do not capture.

Overall, the EPYC wins 6 of 8 head-to-head matchups, but the Intel’s two Geekbench victories are so decisive that they nearly erase the EPYC’s cumulative Cinebench advantage. The average benchmark scores confirm this: Intel’s 7957 and EPYC’s 7952 differ by just 0.1%, placing both at the 64th percentile among all CPUs. In the nearest rival rankings, the two are each other’s closest competitors, with the Intel Xeon Gold 6326 (8071) and Xeon Platinum 8180M (8110) sitting slightly ahead, while the Intel Core i9-10980XE (7910) trails behind.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial. The Intel Core i7-13700E uses Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process from Intel, while the AMD EPYC 7551P employs the original Zen architecture on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The EPYC packs 32 cores and 64 threads, double the Intel’s 16 cores and 24 threads. This core-count advantage drives the EPYC’s Cinebench wins, as rendering workloads scale almost linearly with core availability.

Cache configurations differ sharply. The EPYC provides 96 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, but its shared L3 cache is 64 MB—more than double the Intel’s 30 MB shared L3. The Intel counters with a larger L2 at 2 MB per core and an 80 KB L1 per core. The EPYC’s massive L3 cache likely aids in server workloads with large working sets. Clock speeds tell a different story: the Intel boosts to 5.10 GHz versus the EPYC’s 3.00 GHz, explaining the Intel’s Geekbench dominance. The Intel’s base clock is 1900 MHz, slightly lower than the EPYC’s 2000 MHz, but the boost ceiling is far higher.

Memory support diverges completely. The Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus, while the EPYC is limited to DDR4 but uses an eight-channel configuration with a rated memory bandwidth of 170.6 GB/s. The EPYC’s eight-channel design is typical for server platforms and provides substantially more memory throughput than the Intel’s dual-channel setup. The Intel’s PCIe implementation is newer—Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU—while the EPYC uses Gen 3. The Intel also includes integrated UHD Graphics 770, while the EPYC has no integrated graphics, reflecting its server/workstation market segment.

Other differences include die size and transistor count. The EPYC’s die measures 213 mm² and contains 4,800 million transistors, while the Intel’s die is 257 mm² with no transistor count listed in the data. The Intel uses Socket 1700, the EPYC uses Socket SP3. Both support ECC memory and have unlocked multipliers. The Intel was released on 2023-01-03, the EPYC on 2017-06-28, a gap of over five years that explains the architectural generational differences.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-13700E edges out the AMD EPYC 7551P by a razor-thin margin, scoring 7957 against 7952, a 0.1% difference. Both sit at the 64th percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Why does the EPYC win all Cinebench tests?

A: The EPYC’s 32 cores and 64 threads provide roughly double the parallel compute resources of the Intel’s 16 cores and 24 threads. Cinebench workloads scale with core availability, giving the EPYC a consistent 14% advantage across R15, R20, and R23 variants.

Q: Why does the Intel dominate Geekbench so decisively?

A: The Intel’s 5.10 GHz boost clock versus the EPYC’s 3.00 GHz creates a massive per-thread speed advantage. This shows in Geekbench results, where the Intel leads by 102.2% in multi-core and 165.2% in single-core tests.

Q: Which processor has better memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD EPYC 7551P, with its eight-channel memory bus and rated bandwidth of 170.6 GB/s. The Intel uses a dual-channel bus with no bandwidth figure listed, making the EPYC’s memory subsystem substantially wider.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core i7-13700E and AMD EPYC 7551P support ECC memory. However, the Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the EPYC is limited to DDR4.

Q: Which processor is newer?

A: The Intel Core i7-13700E was released on 2023-01-03, while the AMD EPYC 7551P was released on 2017-06-28. The Intel is roughly five and a half years newer and uses a smaller 10 nm process versus the EPYC’s 14 nm.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture: neither processor is universally superior, and the right choice depends entirely on workload. The AMD EPYC 7551P is the definitive winner for multi-threaded rendering tasks, as evidenced by its sweep of all six Cinebench tests with a consistent 14% margin. Its 32 cores, 64 threads, and 64 MB L3 cache make it a natural fit for server workloads, content creation, or any application that scales across many threads. The EPYC also delivers superior memory bandwidth via its eight-channel configuration, which is critical for memory-intensive server tasks.

The Intel Core i7-13700E is the overwhelming choice for Geekbench-style workloads that favor high clock speeds and per-core efficiency. Its 5.10 GHz boost clock produces more than double the EPYC’s Geekbench multi-core score and over 165% higher single-core performance. For desktop users, gaming, or applications that rely on single-threaded performance, the Intel is the clear winner. Its support for DDR5 memory and PCIe Gen 5 also positions it for modern consumer platforms.

The tie in average scores (7957 vs 7952) is misleading because it masks the extreme workload divergence. The EPYC wins on raw throughput and parallelism; the Intel wins on speed and responsiveness. The 0.1% deltaPct in average score is statistically negligible, but the benchmark-specific deltas—ranging from 14% to 165%—are anything but. The EPYC’s 6-2 head-to-head win count reflects Cinebench’s predominance in the test suite, not overall superiority.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every specification. The Intel uses 16 cores and 24 threads; the AMD uses 32 cores and 64 threads. The Intel’s base clock is 1900 MHz with a 5.10 GHz boost; the AMD’s base is 2000 MHz with a 3.00 GHz boost. The Intel consumes 65 W TDP; the AMD consumes 180 W. The Intel fits Socket 1700; the AMD fits Socket SP3. The Intel uses Raptor Lake on 10 nm; the AMD uses Zen on 14 nm. The Intel’s cache includes 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB shared L3; the AMD’s includes 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 64 MB shared L3. The Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus; the AMD supports only DDR4 on an eight-channel bus with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes; the AMD uses PCIe Gen 3. The Intel has UHD Graphics 770; the AMD has no integrated graphics. The Intel’s die is 257 mm²; the AMD’s is 213 mm² with 4,800 million transistors. The Intel’s part number is SRMG3; the AMD’s is PS755PBDVIHAF.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7551P wins in every Cinebench rendering scenario. Its 14% advantage across R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests makes it the superior choice for 3D rendering, video encoding, and any workload that can utilize 32 cores and 64 threads. The EPYC also wins on memory bandwidth with its eight-channel bus, making it suitable for data-heavy server applications. The EPYC’s 64 MB L3 cache provides a substantial buffer for large datasets, and its server-grade Socket SP3 platform supports enterprise configurations.

The Intel Core i7-13700E wins decisively in Geekbench, with a 102.2% multi-core and 165.2% single-core advantage. This makes it the better pick for desktop applications, interactive workloads, and tasks where clock speed matters more than core count. The Intel’s 5.10 GHz boost clock delivers snappy single-threaded performance that the EPYC cannot match. Its DDR5 memory support and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity bring modern platform features, while its 65 W TDP makes it far more power-efficient than the EPYC’s 180 W envelope.

For mixed workloads, the choice is less clear-cut. The EPYC’s consistent Cinebench wins suggest an edge in heavily threaded batch processing, while the Intel’s Geekbench dominance points to advantages in latency-sensitive or lightly threaded applications. The data shows two processors that are equal in average performance but optimized for opposite ends of the workload spectrum, making the selection a matter of matching the processor to the dominant use case.