AMD EPYC 7552 vs Intel Core i3-10320 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a thoroughly one-sided comparison. Across all six recorded Cinebench tests, the AMD EPYC 7552 posts a decisive victory over the Intel Core i3-10320. The database shows the EPYC 7552 winning every head-to-head matchup, with the Intel processor trailing by margins between 82.6% and 82.7% in each test.

Starting with multi-core workloads, the gap is enormous. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7552 scores 4919 against the i3-10320's 855, a delta of 82.6%. The R20 multi-core test shows a similar pattern: 20496 for AMD versus 3564 for Intel. The R23 multi-core result is the most striking: the EPYC 7552 reaches 48801 while the i3-10320 manages only 8486. These numbers reflect the fundamental difference in core count: the EPYC 7552 packs 48 cores and 96 threads, while the i3-10320 offers just 4 cores and 8 threads.

Single-core performance tells a related but slightly different story. The EPYC 7552 also wins these tests, though the magnitude of the victory is unexpected given the Intel part's higher boost clock. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the EPYC 7552 scores 694 versus 120 for the i3-10320, a delta of 82.7%. The R20 single-core test shows 2893 for AMD against 503 for Intel, and R23 single-core shows 6889 versus 1198. Even in workloads that typically favor higher clock speeds, the EPYC 7552's Zen 2 architecture delivers roughly 5.7 times the single-core score of the Comet Lake i3.

The delta percentages are remarkably consistent, hovering around 82.6% in favor of AMD across all six tests. This uniformity suggests that the performance gap is structural rather than workload-specific. The i3-10320's 4.60 GHz boost clock does not compensate for the architectural and core-count advantages of the EPYC 7552, which boosts to 3.30 GHz but relies on 48 physical cores.

Looking at the broader database context, the i3-10320 sits at the 69th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 14852. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-9750H at 14886 (0.2% ahead), the AMD EPYC 74F3 at 14915 (0.4% ahead), and the Intel Core i5-9600K at 14605 (1.7% behind). The EPYC 7552, meanwhile, sits at the 68th percentile with an average score of 14115, placing it near the Intel Core i5-10400F at 14185 (0.5% ahead) and the Intel Xeon 6756E at 14163 (0.3% ahead). The percentile rankings are nearly identical, but the head-to-head Cinebench numbers tell a far more lopsided story.

The Verdict

The data points to an unambiguous conclusion: the AMD EPYC 7552 is the superior processor in every measured benchmark. For workloads that rely on Cinebench rendering performance, the EPYC 7552 outperforms the i3-10320 by roughly 82.6% across both single-core and multi-core tests. The i3-10320 records zero wins in the head-to-head comparison, while the EPYC 7552 claims all six.

However, the verdict depends heavily on context. The i3-10320 is a desktop processor with a 91 TDP, 4 cores, and integrated UHD Graphics 630. The EPYC 7552 is a server/workstation part with a 200 TDP, 48 cores, and no integrated graphics. These are not interchangeable products. The benchmark data shows that if raw compute throughput is the sole criterion, the EPYC 7552 is the clear choice. The i3-10320's only theoretical advantages lie outside the measured benchmarks: its higher boost clock, lower power envelope, and integrated graphics are not reflected in the Cinebench scores.

For a user selecting between these two, the data strongly favors the EPYC 7552 for any multi-threaded or even single-threaded rendering task. The i3-10320's 69th percentile ranking and average score of 14852 place it slightly above the EPYC 7552's 68th percentile and 14115 average, but that overall average includes PassMark tests where the i3-10320 has recorded scores and the EPYC 7552 does not appear in the head-to-head data. In the six directly comparable Cinebench tests, the EPYC 7552 wins every one.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmarks show no tests where the Intel Core i3-10320 wins. The AMD EPYC 7552 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, covering both single-core and multi-core variants of R15, R20, and R23.

That said, the use-case split can be inferred from the broader data. The i3-10320 has a PassMark single-thread score of 2841, a data compression score of 140255, and an integer math score of 31071. These are substantial figures for a 4-core desktop chip, suggesting adequate performance for everyday desktop tasks, light content creation, and general productivity. The EPYC 7552 has no PassMark scores recorded in the database, so its performance outside Cinebench is not directly measured here.

The EPYC 7552's domain is clearly heavy multi-threaded compute. Its 48 cores and 96 threads, combined with 192 MB of shared L3 cache and eight-channel DDR4 memory support with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, make it suited for server virtualization, database workloads, scientific computing, and large-scale rendering. The i3-10320, with 8 MB of L3 cache, dual-channel memory at 42.7 GB/s, and 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, targets mainstream desktop use.

In practice, the right choice depends on the workload. For single-socket desktop tasks like web browsing, office applications, and light gaming, the i3-10320's integrated graphics and lower TDP make it a reasonable fit. For any workload that scales across cores, the EPYC 7552's 12-fold core advantage translates directly into the benchmark deltas observed.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD EPYC 7552 scores 48801 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, compared to 8486 for the Intel Core i3-10320, a difference of 82.6%.

Q: Does the Intel Core i3-10320 win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The database records six head-to-head Cinebench tests, and the AMD EPYC 7552 wins all six. The Intel processor has zero wins.

Q: How do the single-core scores compare?

A: The EPYC 7552 wins every single-core test as well. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 6889 against 1198 for the i3-10320, a delta of 82.6%.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The Intel Core i3-10320 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The AMD EPYC 7552 has 48 cores and 96 threads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7552 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i3-10320 does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The EPYC 7552 has eight-channel memory with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. The i3-10320 has dual-channel memory with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different architectural lineages. The Intel Core i3-10320 uses the Comet Lake architecture, built on a 14 nm process at Intel's foundry. It is a 4-core, 8-thread desktop chip with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache.

The AMD EPYC 7552 uses the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Rome, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It has 48 cores and 96 threads, with a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 3.30 GHz. The cache configuration is markedly different: 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 192 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC 7552 also lists 3,800 million transistors and a die size of 74 mm², though the i3-10320 does not have recorded values for either metric.

Memory architecture differs substantially. The i3-10320 supports dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support. The EPYC 7552 supports eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory support. PCIe connectivity also diverges: the i3-10320 provides 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, while the EPYC 7552 provides 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes.

The i3-10320 includes integrated UHD Graphics 630, while the EPYC 7552 has no integrated graphics. The Intel part targets the desktop market segment, while the AMD part targets server and workstation use. The EPYC 7552's launch MSRP is $4025, while the i3-10320 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every recorded specification. The Intel Core i3-10320 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD EPYC 7552 has 48 cores and 96 threads. Base clocks are 3.80 GHz versus 2.20 GHz, and boost clocks are 4.60 GHz versus 3.30 GHz. TDP is 91 watts for Intel and 200 watts for AMD.

The socket types are incompatible: the i3-10320 uses Intel Socket 1200, while the EPYC 7552 uses AMD Socket SP3. The process nodes are 14 nm for Intel versus 7 nm for AMD, with different foundries (Intel versus TSMC). The cache sizes differ at every level: L1 is 64 KB per core versus 96 KB per core, L2 is 256 KB per core versus 512 KB per core, and L3 is 8 MB shared versus 192 MB shared.

Memory support shows the EPYC 7552 with eight-channel DDR4 and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, compared to the i3-10320's dual-channel DDR4 at 42.7 GB/s. ECC memory is supported only on the EPYC 7552. PCIe capabilities are Gen 3 with 16 lanes on the Intel part versus Gen 4 with 128 lanes on the AMD part. The i3-10320 has integrated UHD Graphics 630; the EPYC 7552 has none. The i3-10320 is a desktop part, while the EPYC 7552 is a server/workstation part. Their release dates differ as well: the i3-10320 launched on 2020-04-29, and the EPYC 7552 launched on 2019-08-06.