AMD EPYC 7552 vs Intel Core 5 120UL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents an overwhelmingly one-sided comparison. Across all six Cinebench tests recorded in the database, the AMD EPYC 7552 takes the win, with the Intel Core 5 120UL failing to secure a single victory. The margins are staggering, with the EPYC 7552 posting deltas between 443.8% and 446.5% across the board.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the EPYC 7552 scores 4919 against the Core 5 120UL's 904, a 444.1% advantage. The single-core R15 test tells a similar story: 694 for AMD versus 127 for Intel, a 446.5% delta, the largest gap recorded in this head-to-head. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multicore result shows 20496 versus 3769, a 443.8% difference, while single-core lands at 2893 versus 531, a 444.8% gap. Cinebench R23 repeats the pattern: multicore 48801 against 8974 (443.8%), single-core 6889 against 1266 (444.2%).

These figures indicate that the EPYC 7552 is not merely faster; it is roughly 5.4 times faster in every measured workload. The consistency of the delta across all tests, whether single-threaded or multi-threaded, suggests a fundamental performance chasm rather than workload-specific strengths. The Intel part's boost clock of 4.60 GHz does not translate into single-core superiority in these benchmarks, as the EPYC 7552's lower 3.30 GHz boost clock still yields a 444.2% win in R23 single-core.

The average benchmark score in the database reinforces this divide. The EPYC 7552 holds an average score of 14115, while the Core 5 120UL sits at 13594. Interestingly, both processors occupy the same 68th percentile among all CPUs, which indicates that the average score alone can be misleading without the head-to-head context. The nearest rivals for the EPYC 7552 include the Intel Xeon 6756E at 14163 (0.3% ahead), the Intel Core i5-10400F at 14185 (0.5% ahead), and the Intel Core 7 160UL at 14232 (0.8% ahead). For the Core 5 120UL, the nearest competitors are the Intel Core i3-12100F at 13494 (0.7% behind), the Intel Core 3 N355 at 13492 (0.8% behind), and the Intel Core 3 304 at 13745 (1.1% ahead). These rival clusters show that both chips are positioned in their respective performance tiers, but the direct comparison reveals the EPYC's overwhelming dominance.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is vast, explaining the benchmark results. The AMD EPYC 7552 is built on the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Rome, and belongs to the EPYC 7002 series. It is manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC, with 3,800 million transistors packed into a 74 mm² die. The Intel Core 5 120UL, by contrast, uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-PS, and is fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process. The database does not list transistor count or die size for the Intel part.

Core and thread counts diverge sharply. The EPYC 7552 contains 48 cores and 96 threads, while the Core 5 120UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. This 38-core and 84-thread deficit for Intel explains the multicore results, but the single-core results are more surprising. The EPYC 7552's cache hierarchy is also substantially larger: 192 MB of shared L3 cache versus 12 MB shared on the Intel chip. Per-core L1 cache is 96 KB on AMD versus 80 KB on Intel, while per-core L2 cache is 512 KB on AMD versus 1.25 MB on Intel. The Intel part has more L2 per core, but the total L3 advantage for AMD is 180 MB.

Memory support differs fundamentally. The EPYC 7552 supports DDR4 with an eight-channel memory bus and a recorded bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. The Core 5 120UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 but uses a dual-channel bus, with no bandwidth figure recorded in the database. ECC memory is supported on the AMD processor but not on the Intel part. PCIe connectivity also differs: the EPYC 7552 offers Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 5 120UL provides Gen 4 with just 8 lanes (CPU only). The Intel chip includes integrated Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, whereas the AMD processor has no integrated graphics listed.

The sockets and market segments reflect their intended roles. The EPYC 7552 uses AMD Socket SP3 and is classified as Server/Workstation. The Core 5 120UL uses Intel Socket 1700 and is a Desktop part. The production status for both is listed as Active, but the release dates are far apart: the EPYC 7552 launched on 2019-08-06, while the Core 5 120UL arrived on 2024-04-07.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 7552 wins everywhere in this head-to-head, but the nature of the wins matters for use-case analysis. In all six Cinebench tests, the AMD part dominates by roughly 444% to 446%. This makes the EPYC 7552 the clear choice for any workload that relies on CPU rendering, multi-threaded computation, or single-threaded responsiveness as measured by Cinebench. The 48-core, 96-thread configuration, combined with 192 MB of L3 cache and eight-channel DDR4 memory, positions it for server virtualization, database workloads, scientific computing, and heavy content creation tasks that scale with core count and memory bandwidth.

The Core 5 120UL, despite losing every recorded benchmark, still has attributes that suit other scenarios. Its 15 W TDP is dramatically lower than the EPYC 7552's 200 W, making it suitable for fanless or passively cooled desktop systems, embedded applications, or environments where power draw and heat dissipation are critical constraints. The integrated Iris Xe Graphics 80EU provides display output without a discrete GPU, which the EPYC 7552 cannot offer. The support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory gives system builders flexibility in platform choice. Its dual-channel memory bus and 8 PCIe Gen 4 lanes are modest but adequate for entry-level desktop tasks, office productivity, or lightweight media consumption. The 4.60 GHz boost clock is the highest in this comparison, though the benchmark data shows it does not translate into Cinebench wins.

The percentile data places both chips at 68th among all CPUs, which suggests that in the broader market, the Core 5 120UL holds its own against typical desktop processors, even if it cannot compete with a server-class EPYC part. The Intel chip's nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i3-12100F at 13494 (0.7% behind) and the Intel Core 3 N355 at 13492 (0.8% behind), indicate it sits in a competitive range for low-power desktop parts. The EPYC 7552's rivals are similarly close, with the Xeon 6756E just 0.3% ahead and the Core i5-10400F 0.5% ahead, showing that the AMD chip is competitive within its own server-class tier.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications reveal a long list of differences between the two processors. The EPYC 7552 has 48 cores and 96 threads, while the Core 5 120UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks differ: 2.20 GHz for AMD versus 1.30 GHz for Intel. Boost clocks are 3.30 GHz for AMD versus 4.60 GHz for Intel. TDP is 200 W for the EPYC 7552 and 15 W for the Core 5 120UL. Sockets are AMD Socket SP3 versus Intel Socket 1700. Architecture is Zen 2 versus Raptor Lake, with codenames Rome versus Raptor Lake-PS. Process nodes are 7 nm (TSMC) versus 10 nm (Intel). The EPYC 7552 lists 3,800 million transistors and a 74 mm² die size; the Intel part lists neither.

Cache configurations differ across all levels. L1 cache is 96 KB per core on AMD versus 80 KB per core on Intel. L2 cache is 512 KB per core on AMD versus 1.25 MB per core on Intel. L3 cache is 192 MB shared on AMD versus 12 MB shared on Intel. Memory support is DDR4 for AMD versus DDR4 and DDR5 for Intel. Memory bus is eight-channel for AMD versus dual-channel for Intel. Memory bandwidth is 204.8 GB/s for AMD, with no figure recorded for Intel. ECC memory is true for AMD and false for Intel. PCIe is Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only) for AMD versus Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only) for Intel. Integrated graphics are absent on AMD and present on Intel as Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. Market segments are Server/Workstation for AMD and Desktop for Intel. The EPYC 7552 has a launch MSRP of $4025, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the Core 5 120UL. Release dates are 2019-08-06 for AMD and 2024-04-07 for Intel. Both processors have locked multipliers, and the part numbers are 100-000000076 for AMD and unknown for Intel.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-core Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD EPYC 7552 scores 6889 versus 1266 for the Intel Core 5 120UL, a 444.2% advantage for AMD.

Q: How much larger is the AMD part's L3 cache?

A: The EPYC 7552 has 192 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core 5 120UL has 12 MB shared, a difference of 180 MB.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 120UL support ECC memory?

A: No, ECC memory support is listed as false for the Intel part, while the AMD EPYC 7552 supports ECC.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two chips?

A: The EPYC 7552 has a TDP of 200 W, and the Core 5 120UL has a TDP of 15 W.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core 5 120UL includes Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, while the AMD EPYC 7552 has no integrated graphics listed.

Q: How do the two chips compare in average benchmark score?

A: The EPYC 7552 has an average benchmark score of 14115, and the Core 5 120UL has 13594, a difference of 521 points in favor of AMD.