AMD EPYC 7601 vs Intel Core i5-10210U Comparison

# AMD EPYC 7601 vs Intel Core i5-10210U

The AMD EPYC 7601 and Intel Core i5-10210U occupy entirely different corners of the processor market, yet their aggregate benchmark scores land surprisingly close. The EPYC 7601, a 32-core server processor from AMD's EPYC 7001 series, posts an average benchmark score of 8619, while the 4-core mobile i5-10210U from Intel's Core 10th Gen series averages 8344. That difference of roughly 3% masks a chasm in design philosophy, core counts, and intended workloads. What follows is a data-driven comparison of these two processors, using only the facts available in the benchmark database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7601 has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the Intel Core i5-10210U has 4 cores and 8 threads. That is an 8x difference in core count and thread count.

Q: How do their single-core benchmark scores compare?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC 7601 scores 4207 versus the i5-10210U's 723, a delta of 481.9% in favor of AMD. The EPYC 7601 also wins Cinebench R15 and R20 single-core by margins of 487.5% and 482.8%, respectively.

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

A: The EPYC 7601 leads by roughly 482% across all Cinebench multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 29800 versus 5122 for the i5-10210U, representing a 481.8% advantage.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7601 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i5-10210U does not. This aligns with the EPYC's server/workstation positioning.

Q: What are their market segments and production statuses?

A: The EPYC 7601 is a Server/Workstation processor and is still marked as Active production. The i5-10210U is a Mobile processor and is listed as End-of-life.

Q: How do their aggregate scores and percentiles compare?

A: The EPYC 7601 has an average benchmark score of 8619 and sits at the 65th percentile of all CPUs. The i5-10210U averages 8344 and sits at the 64th percentile. Despite the massive core count difference, their overall rankings are nearly identical.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture: the AMD EPYC 7601 wins every single head-to-head benchmark in this comparison, taking all 6 matched tests. The i5-10210U records zero wins. For anyone needing raw multi-threaded throughput, the EPYC 7601 is the obvious choice — its 32 cores and 64 threads deliver Cinebench R23 multi-core scores nearly six times higher than the i5-10210U's. The EPYC also dominates single-core tests by margins exceeding 480%, which is surprising given that the i5-10210U has a higher boost clock of 4.20 GHz versus the EPYC's 3.20 GHz. However, the i5-10210U's lower power envelope (25 W TDP versus 180 W), integrated UHD Graphics, and mobile BGA 1440 socket make it the only practical option for laptops and portable devices. The EPYC 7601 requires AMD Socket SP3 and is designed for server racks, not notebooks. The verdict depends entirely on form factor and workload: the EPYC for compute density, the i5 for mobility.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is one-sided to an extreme degree. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7601 scores 3003 against the i5-10210U's 516, a 482% advantage. The single-core R15 test shows a similar story: 423 versus 72, a 487.5% delta. Moving to Cinebench R20, the EPYC posts 12516 multi-core versus 2151, and 1766 single-core versus 303 — deltas of 481.9% and 482.8%, respectively. The newest Cinebench R23 test echoes the pattern: 29800 versus 5122 multi-core (481.8% delta) and 4207 versus 723 single-core (481.9% delta). Every single benchmark in the head-to-head list favors the EPYC 7601 by a margin between 481.8% and 487.5%.

What is notable here is the consistency of the margin. Whether single-core or multi-core, the EPYC leads by roughly the same percentage, hovering around 482-488%. This suggests the performance gap is not merely about core count — if it were, multi-core margins would be much larger than single-core ones. The fact that single-core performance also favors the EPYC by nearly 5x indicates a fundamental architectural advantage in this benchmark suite, despite the i5-10210U's higher boost clock of 4.20 GHz versus 3.20 GHz.

The i5-10210U does have benchmark data beyond the Cinebench suite — it scores 3054 in Geekbench multi-core and 1213 in single-core, plus PassMark scores for data compression (80157), encryption (2051), and integer math (22732). The EPYC 7601 has no corresponding Geekbench or PassMark entries in this dataset, so those workloads cannot be directly compared. But for the six benchmarks where both processors have scores, the EPYC wins all six.

Specification Differences

The core specifications could not diverge more sharply. The EPYC 7601 runs 32 cores and 64 threads, while the i5-10210U runs 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 2.20 GHz for the EPYC and 1600.00 MHz (1.60 GHz) for the i5, though the i5 boosts higher at 4.20 GHz versus 3.20 GHz. Thermal design power is a major differentiator: the EPYC draws 180 W, the i5 just 25 W. Sockets are incompatible — AMD Socket SP3 for the EPYC, Intel BGA 1440 for the i5.

Memory support separates them further. The EPYC supports DDR4 with an eight-channel memory bus and 170.6 GB/s bandwidth, plus ECC memory. The i5 supports both DDR3 and DDR4 but has no listed memory bus width or bandwidth figure, and no ECC support. Cache hierarchies are also distinct: the EPYC has 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 64 MB shared L3; the i5 has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and only 6 MB shared L3. The EPYC offers PCIe Gen 3; the i5's PCIe support is not listed. The i5 includes integrated UHD Graphics; the EPYC has none. The EPYC's multiplier is unlocked; the i5's is not. The EPYC has a part number (PS7601BDVIHAF); the i5 does not.

Architecture Differences

The EPYC 7601 is built on AMD's Zen architecture, codenamed Naples, part of the EPYC 7001 series. It uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. The i5-10210U uses Intel's Comet Lake architecture, specifically Comet Lake-U, part of the Core 10th Gen series. It also uses a 14 nm process, but at Intel's own foundry; transistor count and die size are not listed. Both processors are 14 nm, but the EPYC's Naples design targets server density while the i5's Comet Lake-U targets mobile efficiency.

The EPYC's cache design reflects its server heritage: 64 MB of shared L3 cache is enormous compared to the i5's 6 MB. Per-core L1 and L2 caches are also larger on the EPYC (96 KB and 512 KB per core versus 64 KB and 256 KB per core). The EPYC's eight-channel memory bus with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth is a server-class feature absent from the i5's mobile design. ECC memory support on the EPYC further reinforces its data-center role. The i5 counters with integrated graphics, which the EPYC lacks entirely — a feature essential for mobile devices but irrelevant for server workloads. The i5's release date of August 2019 is later than the EPYC's June 2017 launch, but the EPYC remains Active in production while the i5 is End-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7601 wins every benchmark in this comparison, and its advantages are concentrated in exactly the areas that matter for server and workstation workloads. Multi-threaded Cinebench scores — 29800 in R23, 12516 in R20, 3003 in R15 — indicate massive parallel compute capability suited for rendering, scientific computing, and virtualization. The 64 MB L3 cache and eight-channel DDR4 memory with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth are designed for data-intensive applications. ECC memory support protects against data corruption in long-running enterprise workloads. The unlocked multiplier offers tuning flexibility for performance-optimized environments. The Active production status means continued availability for system builders.

The Intel Core i5-10210U wins nowhere in the head-to-head benchmarks, but its specification sheet reveals where it would excel in real-world deployment. At 25 W TDP versus 180 W, it consumes a fraction of the power — critical for laptops. The integrated UHD Graphics eliminates the need for a discrete GPU in basic systems. The BGA 1440 socket is soldered directly to motherboards in ultraportable designs. DDR3 and DDR4 memory support offers flexibility for various mobile platforms. Its 4.20 GHz boost clock is higher than the EPYC's 3.20 GHz, which could benefit short, single-threaded bursts in everyday applications. The i5 also has additional benchmark data in Geekbench and PassMark suites, showing capabilities in data compression (80157), encryption (2051), and floating-point math (13657) — though no EPYC scores exist for those tests to enable a direct comparison.

The data suggests a simple conclusion: the EPYC 7601 is the performance king, the i5-10210U is the mobility champion. The 482% margins in Cinebench make the EPYC's compute dominance undeniable, but the i5's 25 W power draw and integrated graphics make it the only viable option for portable devices. No amount of raw performance can overcome a socket mismatch — the EPYC simply cannot go where the i5 lives.