AMD EPYC 7573X vs Intel Core i5-1235U Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark record splits cleanly along workload type, but not in the way one might expect from the core counts alone. The AMD EPYC 7573X wins all six recorded head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, covering both single-core and multi-core tests. The Intel Core i5-1235U does not register a single win in the head-to-head portion of the database, though it holds its own in the broader percentile rankings.

For multi-threaded rendering and compute, the EPYC 7573X is in a different class entirely. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 59017 against the i5-1235U's 9774, a delta of 503.8%. That gap is consistent across every multi-core test: R15 shows 5948 versus 985 (503.9%), and R20 shows 24787 versus 4105 (503.8%). The pattern is unmistakable. The EPYC is built for sustained, heavily parallel workloads where 32 cores and 64 threads can stretch out.

What is more surprising is the single-core picture. The EPYC 7573X also leads in every single-core Cinebench test, despite the i5-1235U having a much higher boost clock of 4.40 GHz versus 3.60 GHz. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC scores 8331 against 1379, a 504.1% advantage. In R20 single-core, it is 3499 versus 579 (504.3%), and in R15 single-core it is 839 versus 138 (508%). The Intel part's higher clock does not translate into a win; the Zen 3 architecture in Milan-X simply produces more instructions per cycle in these recorded runs.

That said, the i5-1235U has strengths outside the Cinebench suite. The database includes PassMark and Geekbench results for the Intel part only, and those show competitive integer math (48553), floating point math (43303), and data compression (147450) scores. The i5-1235U also carries integrated Iris Xe graphics with 80 execution units, which the EPYC lacks entirely. For a mobile processor, that makes it a complete package for everyday tasks, even if it cannot touch the EPYC in raw rendering throughput.

The use-case split is therefore stark: the EPYC 7573X is the choice for server, workstation, and any workload where core count and cache depth dominate. The i5-1235U is the choice for thin-and-light laptops where power draw, integrated graphics, and single-socket mobility matter more than absolute compute.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different worlds, and the architecture reflects that. The AMD EPYC 7573X uses Zen 3 on a 7 nm TSMC process, with 33,200 million transistors spread across 8 dies, each 81 mm². The codename is Milan-X, part of the EPYC 7003 series, and it uses AMD Socket SP3. The Intel Core i5-1235U uses Alder Lake-U on Intel's 10 nm process, soldered into Intel BGA 1744. No transistor count or die size is recorded for the Intel part.

Cache is where the EPYC 7573X becomes extraordinary. It has 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 768 MB of shared L3 cache. That 768 MB figure is the headline feature of Milan-X, enabled by 3D V-Cache stacking. The i5-1235U, by contrast, has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The EPYC has 64 times more L3 cache. For workloads that fit in cache, such as database lookups or large simulation meshes, that advantage is decisive.

Memory support also diverges. The EPYC 7573X supports DDR4 over an eight-channel memory bus, delivering a recorded memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, and it supports ECC memory. The i5-1235U supports both DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, but no bandwidth figure is recorded, and it does not support ECC. The EPYC also offers 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only), versus 20 lanes on the Intel part.

The core configurations could not be more different. The EPYC has 32 cores and 64 threads, with a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 3.60 GHz, at a TDP of 280 W. The i5-1235U has 10 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 1300.00 MHz (1.30 GHz) and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, at a TDP of 15 W. The Intel part uses a hybrid architecture with performance and efficiency cores, which is typical of Alder Lake-U, though the database does not break out the core mix. The EPYC uses a symmetrical 32-core layout.

Both processors have locked multipliers, so neither is unlocked for overclocking. The EPYC is marked for the Server/Workstation segment; the i5-1235U is marked for Mobile. The EPYC launched on 2022-03-21 with a launch MSRP of $5590. The i5-1235U launched on 2022-02-22 with no recorded MSRP.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion for most buyers: if your workload is multi-threaded rendering, simulation, or any server-class task, the AMD EPYC 7573X is the overwhelming choice. Its 59017 Cinebench R23 multi-core score is more than six times the i5-1235U's 9774. The 768 MB L3 cache and 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth are in a league the mobile part cannot approach. The EPYC also leads in single-core Cinebench tests, so there is no scenario in that suite where the Intel part wins.

However, the i5-1235U is not a failed product. It sits at the 70th percentile among all CPUs in the database, barely behind the EPYC's 71st percentile. Its average benchmark score is 16770 versus the EPYC's 17070, a difference of about 1.8%. That is remarkable for a 15 W mobile chip against a 280 W server part. The i5-1235U also has integrated Iris Xe graphics, which the EPYC lacks, and its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 115U and AMD Ryzen 3 7335U, all clustered within a fraction of a percent.

Who should pick the i5-1235U? Anyone buying a laptop. The 15 W TDP, built-in graphics, and mobile socket make it the only viable option of the two for portable systems. Who should pick the EPYC 7573X? Anyone building a server or workstation. The 280 W TDP and SP3 socket are not laptop-compatible, and the price point reflects a professional part.

The verdict from the recorded data: the EPYC 7573X wins every head-to-head benchmark, but the two parts are not competing for the same buyer. One is a data-center workhorse; the other is a mobile all-rounder. Choose the EPYC for compute density, choose the i5 for mobility.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7573X has 32 cores and 64 threads. The Intel Core i5-1235U has 10 cores and 12 threads.

Q: How large is the L3 cache on each processor?

A: The AMD EPYC 7573X has 768 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core i5-1235U has 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-1235U support ECC memory?

A: No. The i5-1235U does not support ECC memory. The AMD EPYC 7573X does support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i5-1235U has Iris Xe graphics with 80 execution units. The AMD EPYC 7573X has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD EPYC 7573X has a TDP of 280 W. The Intel Core i5-1235U has a TDP of 15 W.

Q: Did the Intel Core i5-1235U win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The AMD EPYC 7573X won all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, with deltas ranging from 503.8% to 508%.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head table in the database contains six Cinebench tests, and the AMD EPYC 7573X wins all of them by a margin of roughly 500%. That consistency is worth examining closely, because it shows a systematic performance gap rather than a single-test anomaly.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7573X scores 5948 against the i5-1235U's 985, a delta of 503.9%. In R15 single-core, the EPYC scores 839 against 138, a delta of 508%, which is the largest percentage margin in the entire head-to-head set. The R20 tests follow the same shape: multi-core is 24787 versus 4105 (503.8%), and single-core is 3499 versus 579 (504.3%). The R23 tests close the set: multi-core is 59017 versus 9774 (503.8%), and single-core is 8331 versus 1379 (504.1%).

The near-identical delta percentages across all six tests are notable. They suggest that the EPYC's advantage is not workload-dependent within Cinebench; it is a flat multiplier of roughly six times the Intel part's output. That aligns with the core and thread counts: 32 cores and 64 threads versus 10 cores and 12 threads, but the single-core results show the architecture is also faster per-thread. The EPYC's single-core R23 score of 8331 is not just a core-count artifact; it is a genuinely higher per-thread result than the i5's 1379.

Looking outside the head-to-head set, the i5-1235U's additional benchmarks show where it can compete. Its Geekbench multi-core score is 5308 and single-core is 1609. Its PassMark integer math score is 48553, floating point math is 43303, and data compression is 147450. Those are respectable numbers for a mobile chip, and they explain why its average benchmark score (16770) is so close to the EPYC's (17070). The EPYC's average is dragged up by the Cinebench multi-core results; the i5's average benefits from a broader test suite that includes lighter workloads.

But in the direct comparison, there is no ambiguity. The EPYC 7573X outperforms the i5-1235U by more than five-fold in every recorded head-to-head test. The database records 6 wins for the EPYC and 0 for the i5. The only question is whether a buyer needs the EPYC's server-class capabilities, because the i5-1235U clearly serves a different market segment with a fraction of the power draw. The data does not suggest the i5 is a bad chip; it suggests the EPYC is a specialized tool for a different job.