AMD EPYC 7552 vs Intel Core i7-8750H Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7552 and Intel Core i7-8750H occupy opposite ends of the computing spectrum, yet both land at the 68th percentile of all CPUs in the database. This is a striking statistical coincidence, but the benchmark data reveals that their comparable aggregate standing masks wildly divergent performance profiles. The EPYC 7552 is a 48-core server behemoth, while the i7-8750H is a 6-core mobile processor. The head-to-head benchmarks show a clean sweep for the AMD part, with every Cinebench test delivering a deltaPct of approximately 490% in its favor. The data does not support any scenario where the Intel chip wins a compute race; instead, its value lies entirely in its platform context.

The Verdict

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 7552 outperforms the Intel Core i7-8750H in every single measured workload, with margins ranging from 489.8% to 493.2%. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 48,801 versus 8,274 for the i7 — a 489.8% advantage. Single-core results are similarly lopsided, with the EPYC leading by 489.8% in R23 single-core (6,889 vs 1,168). The i7-8750H records zero wins across all six head-to-head tests.

Given this data, the EPYC 7552 is the only choice for any workload that benefits from raw compute throughput. Its 48 cores and 96 threads provide a scale of parallelism that the 6-core, 12-thread i7 simply cannot approach. However, the i7-8750H is a mobile part with a 45W TDP, while the EPYC consumes 200W. The Intel chip is designed for laptops and compact systems where the EPYC's Socket SP3 platform would be physically and thermally impossible. The verdict from the data is not about which is "better" in absolute terms — it is about matching the processor to the physical environment. For server racks and workstations, the EPYC 7552 is the overwhelming winner. For battery-powered portability, the i7-8750H exists in a category the EPYC cannot serve.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are separated by more than just core count; they represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The EPYC 7552 is built on AMD's Zen 2 architecture (codename Rome) using a 7 nm process at TSMC, while the i7-8750H uses Intel's Coffee Lake architecture (Coffee Lake-H) on a 14 nm process. The process node difference is a full generation apart, which contributes to the EPYC's ability to pack 48 cores into a 74 mm² die size. The i7-8750H, by contrast, has a larger 149 mm² die but only 6 cores. The EPYC also integrates 3,800 million transistors, while the Intel part does not have a listed transistor count.

Cache hierarchies differ dramatically. The EPYC 7552 provides 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 192 MB of shared L3 cache. The i7-8750H offers 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and just 12 MB of shared L3. This 16x difference in L3 capacity (192 MB vs 12 MB) is a key factor in the EPYC's ability to keep 48 cores fed with data. Memory support also diverges: both use DDR4, but the EPYC features an eight-channel memory bus with 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth, while the i7 has no listed memory bus or bandwidth specification. ECC memory is supported on the EPYC but not on the i7-8750H. The EPYC also offers PCIe Gen 4 with 128 lanes, whereas the i7 has no listed PCIe specification. Finally, the i7-8750H includes integrated UHD 630 graphics, while the EPYC has no integrated graphics at all — a clear sign of their intended roles.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results tell a story of total dominance. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7552 scores 4,919 versus 834 for the i7-8750H, a 489.8% delta. The R15 single-core test shows a 493.2% advantage (694 vs 117). Moving to R20, the EPYC repeats the 489.8% margin in multi-core (20,496 vs 3,475) and 490.4% in single-core (2,893 vs 490). R23 results continue the pattern: multi-core at 489.8% (48,801 vs 8,274) and single-core at 489.8% (6,889 vs 1,168).

The consistency of these margins is remarkable. Every multi-core test lands at exactly 489.8% — that is not a coincidence but a reflection of the core count and thread scaling. The single-core deltas vary slightly (493.2%, 490.4%, 489.8%), suggesting that the EPYC's per-thread performance is not only competitive but actually superior to the i7's. This is unexpected given the i7's higher boost clock of 4.10 GHz versus the EPYC's 3.30 GHz. The data implies that Zen 2's architecture at 7 nm delivers more instructions per clock than Coffee Lake at 14 nm, even at lower clock speeds. The i7's base clock of 2.20 GHz matches the EPYC's base clock exactly, yet the EPYC still wins single-core by a factor of nearly six. This points to architectural efficiency rather than raw frequency as the deciding factor.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7552 has 48 cores and 96 threads, while the Intel Core i7-8750H has 6 cores and 12 threads — an 8x difference in core count and thread count.

Q: What is the performance gap in multi-core workloads?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 7552 scores 48,801 versus 8,274 for the i7-8750H, a 489.8% advantage. The same delta applies to R15 and R20 multi-core tests.

Q: Does the Intel chip win any benchmark?

A: No. Across all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, the EPYC 7552 wins all of them (6 wins for AMD, 0 for Intel).

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth support?

A: The EPYC 7552 supports an eight-channel DDR4 memory bus with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. The i7-8750H lists DDR4 support but has no specified memory bus width or bandwidth figure.

Q: Which processor is more power-efficient?

A: The data does not provide efficiency metrics, but the TDP figures differ: the EPYC 7552 is rated at 200W, while the i7-8750H is rated at 45W. That makes the Intel chip draw 155W less, but it also delivers roughly 1/6th the performance.

Q: Are these processors in the same market segment?

A: No. The EPYC 7552 is a Server/Workstation part, while the i7-8750H is a Mobile processor. Their sockets differ (AMD Socket SP3 vs Intel BGA 1440), and they are not interchangeable.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 7552 wins every benchmark category that was tested. Its 489.8% margins in multi-core tests make it the definitive choice for heavily threaded workloads such as database servers, virtualization hosts, scientific computing, or any task that can utilize 48 cores simultaneously. The 192 MB of L3 cache and eight-channel memory bandwidth further reinforce its suitability for data-intensive server workloads. The single-core wins, while surprising given the i7's higher boost clock, indicate that the EPYC 7552 is also no slouch in lightly threaded tasks — it just so happens that its "light" performance is nearly five times better than the i7's.

The i7-8750H's wins are not in performance but in platform characteristics. It is a mobile processor with a 45W TDP, making it feasible for laptops and compact devices where the 200W EPYC cannot operate. It includes integrated UHD 630 graphics, eliminating the need for a discrete GPU in basic systems. Its end-of-life production status and BGA 1440 socket suggest it was designed for a specific generation of laptops, while the EPYC remains in active production. For users who need a processor that runs on battery power and fits in a thin chassis, the i7-8750H is the only viable option between these two — but the data cannot justify it on performance grounds.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 7552 | Intel Core i7-8750H |

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

| Cores | 48 | 6 |

| Threads | 96 | 12 |

| Boost Clock | 3.30 GHz | 4.10 GHz |

| TDP | 200W | 45W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | Intel BGA 1440 |

| Architecture | Zen 2 | Coffee Lake |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 3,800 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 74 mm² | 149 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 96 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

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

| L3 Cache | 192 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Eight-channel | Not listed |

| Memory Bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | Not listed |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 128 Lanes | Not listed |

| Integrated Graphics | None | UHD 630 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Launch MSRP | $4025 | Not listed |

The specification table highlights the fundamental incompatibility of these two parts. The EPYC 7552 has eight times the cores, 16 times the L3 cache, and a 7 nm process versus 14 nm. The i7-8750H counters with a higher boost clock (4.10 vs 3.30 GHz) and a much lower TDP (45 vs 200W). The launch MSRP of $4025 for the EPYC reflects its server positioning, while the i7 has no listed launch price. The data shows that clock speed alone cannot overcome core count and architectural efficiency — the EPYC wins every benchmark despite the i7's 0.80 GHz boost advantage. Each processor wins in its own domain: the EPYC for raw compute, the i7 for mobility.