AMD EPYC 7573X vs Intel Core i5-1240U Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7573X and Intel Core i5-1240U represent two opposite extremes of the processor market: a 32-core server behemoth designed for heavy multi-threaded workloads, and a 10-core mobile chip built for efficiency in thin-and-light laptops. The benchmark data reflects this divide clearly, with the EPYC 7573X dominating every single Cinebench test, while the i5-1240U counters with a lower power envelope and integrated graphics. Their average benchmark scores are remarkably close—17070 for the EPYC and 16957 for the i5—but this is a statistical artifact of averaging diverse workloads, as the head-to-head results tell a very different story.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The EPYC 7573X wins all six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, and the margins are staggering. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 59017 against the i5-1240U's 7902, a delta of 646.9%. This is the largest single advantage in the dataset, reflecting the EPYC's 32 cores and 64 threads against the i5's 10 cores and 12 threads. Even in single-core tests, where the i5's 4.40 GHz boost clock might be expected to help, the EPYC leads: Cinebench R23 single-core shows 8331 versus 1559, a 434.4% advantage. The EPYC's 3.60 GHz boost clock is lower than the i5's 4.40 GHz, but the Zen 3 architecture's efficiency per clock more than compensates.

The multi-core gaps grow with workload intensity. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 378.9% delta (5948 vs 1242), while R20 multi-core reaches 394.5% (24787 vs 5013). The R23 multi-core delta of 646.9% is disproportionately larger, suggesting the EPYC scales better as the render workload becomes more demanding. Single-core deltas follow a similar pattern: R15 shows 271.2% (839 vs 226), R20 shows 394.9% (3499 vs 707), and R23 shows 434.4% (8331 vs 1559). The EPYC's single-core advantage actually grows in newer Cinebench versions, indicating that Zen 3's IPC improvements are more pronounced in modern instruction mixes.

The i5-1240U does have additional PassMark benchmarks in the FACT PACK, but the EPYC 7573X has no corresponding PassMark data. The i5's best PassMark result is 143102 in data compression, with integer math at 44968 and floating-point math at 29726. These numbers are not directly comparable to the EPYC's Cinebench scores, but they do show the i5's capabilities in non-render workloads. However, the head-to-head data only includes Cinebench tests, and the EPYC wins all 6, while the i5 wins 0. The percentile rankings are close—71st for the EPYC and 70th for the i5—but this reflects their positions among all CPUs, not their performance relative to each other.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is fundamental. The AMD EPYC 7573X uses the Zen 3 architecture on a 7 nm TSMC process, with 33,200 million transistors spread across 8 dies of 81 mm² each. The Intel Core i5-1240U uses Alder Lake on Intel's 10 nm process, with no transistor or die size data available. The node difference is significant: 7 nm allows for higher density and better power efficiency per transistor, which partly explains how the EPYC packs 32 cores into a 280 W TDP while the i5 fits 10 cores into just 9 W.

Cache configurations are wildly different. The EPYC 7573X features 64 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, plus a massive 768 MB of shared L3 cache. This is the Milan-X design with 3D V-Cache, though the FACT PACK does not specify the vCache3d field. The i5-1240U has 80 KB of L1 and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, but only 12 MB of shared L3. The EPYC's 768 MB L3 is 64 times larger than the i5's 12 MB, which gives it a massive advantage in workloads that fit within cache, such as database operations or scientific simulations.

Memory support diverges completely. The EPYC supports DDR4 only, with an eight-channel memory bus and 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The i5-1240U supports both DDR4 and DDR5, but only with a dual-channel bus, and no bandwidth figure is listed. ECC memory is supported by the EPYC but not the i5. PCIe connectivity also differs: the EPYC offers Gen 4 with 128 lanes from the CPU, while the i5 offers Gen 4 without a lane count specified. The EPYC has no integrated graphics, while the i5 includes Iris Xe 80EU graphics.

The socket and form factor are incompatible. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3, a server platform, while the i5 uses Intel BGA 1781, a soldered mobile package. The EPYC is a server/workstation part, while the i5 is a mobile part. The EPYC launched on 2022-03-21 with a launch MSRP of $5590, while the i5 launched on 2022-02-22 with no MSRP listed. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7573X has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the Intel Core i5-1240U has 10 cores and 12 threads. This 3.2x core advantage and 5.3x thread advantage is the primary driver of the EPYC's multi-core performance lead.

Q: How does the single-core performance compare?

A: The EPYC 7573X wins all single-core Cinebench tests despite a lower boost clock (3.60 GHz vs 4.40 GHz). In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC scores 8331 versus 1559 for the i5-1240U, a 434.4% advantage. The i5's higher clock speed does not overcome the EPYC's superior IPC from the Zen 3 architecture.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The EPYC 7573X has a TDP of 280 W, while the i5-1240U has a TDP of just 9 W. The i5 is designed for fanless or low-noise mobile devices, while the EPYC requires robust server cooling. The i5's 9 W TDP is less than 4% of the EPYC's 280 W, making it dramatically more power-efficient for light workloads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD EPYC 7573X supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i5-1240U does not support ECC. This makes the EPYC suitable for data integrity-critical server workloads, while the i5 is not.

Q: How do their cache sizes compare?

A: The EPYC 7573X has 768 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i5-1240U has 12 MB. The EPYC also has 64 KB L1 and 512 KB L2 per core, versus 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 per core for the i5. The EPYC's 64x larger L3 cache is its defining feature, ideal for cache-resident datasets.

Q: What integrated graphics does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core i5-1240U includes Iris Xe 80EU integrated graphics. The AMD EPYC 7573X has no integrated graphics, meaning it requires a discrete GPU for display output. This is expected for a server processor but limits its use in standalone systems.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 7573X | Intel Core i5-1240U |

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

| Cores | 32 | 10 |

| Threads | 64 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 2.80 GHz | 1100.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.60 GHz | 4.40 GHz |

| TDP | 280 W | 9 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | Intel BGA 1781 |

| Architecture | Zen 3 | Alder Lake |

| Codename | Milan-X | Alder Lake-U |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 33,200 million | null |

| Die Size | 8x 81 mm² | null |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 768 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Eight-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | null |

| ECC Memory | true | false |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 128 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4 |

| Integrated Graphics | null | Iris Xe 80EU |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2022-03-21 | 2022-02-22 |

| Launch MSRP | $5590 | null |

The Verdict

The data supports an unambiguous split: the AMD EPYC 7573X is for compute-intensive server and workstation workloads where multi-core throughput and massive cache are paramount. Its 646.9% lead over the i5-1240U in Cinebench R23 multi-core, combined with 768 MB of L3 cache and ECC memory support, makes it the only choice for rendering farms, scientific computing, and virtualized environments. The 280 W TDP is a non-issue in a server chassis with appropriate cooling.

The Intel Core i5-1240U serves a completely different purpose. Its 9 W TDP, integrated Iris Xe graphics, and mobile BGA socket make it suitable for thin laptops and fanless designs where battery life and portability matter more than raw performance. Its 70th percentile ranking versus the EPYC's 71st is misleading—the i5's PassMark scores in data compression (143102) and integer math (44968) show it can handle everyday productivity tasks, but it is not designed for sustained heavy loads.

There is no scenario where these two processors compete directly for the same buyer. The EPYC 7573X's nearest rivals are other server chips like the AMD EPYC 7H12 (deltaPct -0.3) and desktop parts like the Intel Core i5-11400 (deltaPct 0), while the i5-1240U's rivals include the AMD EPYC 7702 (deltaPct 0.1) and Intel Core i7-1260P (deltaPct -0.3). The EPYC's 32-core, 280 W design targets maximum throughput; the i5's 10-core, 9 W design targets minimum power draw. Choose the EPYC for a server room, the i5 for a laptop bag. Neither is a substitute for the other.