AMD EPYC 7601 vs Intel Core i7-8650U Comparison

The Intel Core i7-8650U and AMD EPYC 7601 occupy opposite ends of the computing spectrum, and benchmark data reflects this divide without ambiguity. The EPYC 7601 wins every head-to-head benchmark in the data set, often by margins exceeding 80% in Cinebench tests. While the i7-8650U is a mobile part with a 15 W TDP, the EPYC 7601 is a 180 W server processor with 32 cores, and the performance gap is consistent with that architectural chasm.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD EPYC 7601 dominates every single benchmark comparison, with the Intel Core i7-8650U trailing by roughly 82% in all six Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 7601 scores 29,800 versus the i7-8650U’s 5,253, a delta of -82.4% for the Intel part. The single-core R23 result tells the same story: EPYC 7601 scores 4,207 while the i7-8650U manages 741, again a -82.4% delta. These are not marginal differences; the EPYC 7601 is delivering over five times the multi-core throughput in this workload.

The pattern holds across older Cinebench versions. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the AMD part scores 12,516 against 2,206 for the Intel chip, a -82.4% delta. The single-core R20 test shows 1,766 for EPYC versus 311 for the i7-8650U, another -82.4% delta. Even in Cinebench R15, the results are consistent: 3,003 versus 529 in multi-core, and 423 versus 74 in single-core, both with -82.4% and -82.5% deltas respectively. The EPYC 7601 wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, with the Intel part winning zero.

The near-identical delta percentages across all tests suggest a fixed performance ratio rather than workload-specific behavior. The EPYC 7601’s advantage is uniform, not situational. This is a processor built for throughput, and the benchmarks show it achieving that goal consistently. The i7-8650U’s scores, while lower, are not anomalous — they reflect a low-power mobile design competing against a server-class part.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on the same 14 nm process node, but the similarities end there. The Intel Core i7-8650U uses the Kaby Lake architecture (codename Kaby Lake-R) and is fabricated by Intel, while the AMD EPYC 7601 uses the Zen architecture (codename Naples) and is fabricated by GlobalFoundries. The EPYC 7601 integrates 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die, whereas the i7-8650U has a 123 mm² die with no transistor count listed in the data.

Core counts diverge sharply. The i7-8650U has 4 cores and 8 threads; the EPYC 7601 has 32 cores and 64 threads. This 8x core advantage is the primary driver of the multi-core benchmark results. Cache configurations also differ substantially: the Intel part has 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, with 8 MB shared L3, while the AMD part has 96 KB L1 and 512 KB L2 per core, with 64 MB shared L3. The EPYC 7601’s 64 MB L3 cache is eight times larger than the i7-8650U’s.

Memory support highlights the server positioning of the EPYC 7601. Both support DDR4 memory, but the AMD part features an eight-channel memory bus with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel part’s memory bus and bandwidth are not listed. The EPYC 7601 also supports ECC memory, which the i7-8650U does not. The AMD part includes Gen 3 PCIe, while the Intel part’s PCIe configuration is not specified in the data. The i7-8650U includes integrated UHD 620 graphics; the EPYC 7601 has no integrated graphics.

Clock speeds tell a nuanced story. The i7-8650U has a base clock of 1900 MHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz, while the EPYC 7601 has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. Despite lower clock speeds, the EPYC 7601 wins even single-core benchmarks, indicating that its Zen architecture and larger cache compensate for the lower boost frequency. The i7-8650U’s higher boost clock does not translate into a single-core victory.

Where Each One Wins

The data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 7601 wins every benchmark in the comparison set. There is no workload category in the head-to-head data where the Intel Core i7-8650U takes the lead. This includes both multi-core and single-core Cinebench tests, meaning the EPYC 7601’s advantage is not limited to heavily threaded workloads — it also wins in lightly threaded scenarios.

For the Intel i7-8650U, the only winning scenario is one of efficiency rather than raw performance. Its 15 W TDP versus the EPYC 7601’s 180 W TDP makes it suitable for mobile and low-power environments. The i7-8650U’s integrated UHD 620 graphics also give it a feature the EPYC 7601 lacks. However, in terms of benchmark scores, the i7-8650U has zero wins across all six head-to-head tests.

The EPYC 7601’s wins are decisive and uniform. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 3,003 versus 529, a gap of 2,474 points. In R20 multi-core, the gap is 10,310 points (12,516 versus 2,206). In R23 multi-core, the gap is 24,547 points (29,800 versus 5,253). The single-core gaps are smaller in absolute terms but proportionally identical: 349 points in R15, 1,455 in R20, and 3,466 in R23. Every win for the EPYC 7601 comes with a delta of approximately -82.4% for the i7-8650U.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every measurable specification. The i7-8650U has 4 cores and 8 threads; the EPYC 7601 has 32 cores and 64 threads. Base clocks are 1900 MHz for Intel and 2.20 GHz for AMD, while boost clocks are 4.20 GHz and 3.20 GHz respectively. TDP is 15 W for the i7-8650U and 180 W for the EPYC 7601.

Socket compatibility is completely different: Intel uses BGA 1356, while AMD uses Socket SP3. The architecture differs (Kaby Lake versus Zen), as does the codename (Kaby Lake-R versus Naples). The process node is the same at 14 nm, but the foundry differs (Intel versus GlobalFoundries). The EPYC 7601 lists 4,800 million transistors; the i7-8650U does not list a transistor count. Die size is 123 mm² for Intel and 213 mm² for AMD.

Cache layouts diverge: 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core for Intel versus 96 KB L1 and 512 KB L2 per core for AMD, with shared L3 of 8 MB versus 64 MB. Memory support is DDR4 for both, but the EPYC 7601 has an eight-channel bus and 170.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the i7-8650U lists neither. ECC memory is supported only on the EPYC 7601. PCIe generation is Gen 3 on AMD, not listed on Intel. Integrated graphics are UHD 620 on Intel, none on AMD. The EPYC 7601 has an unlocked multiplier; the i7-8650U does not. Market segments are Mobile for Intel and Server/Workstation for AMD.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most benchmarks in the comparison data?

A: The AMD EPYC 7601 wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, with the Intel Core i7-8650U recording zero wins.

Q: What is the performance gap in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The EPYC 7601 scores 29,800 versus the i7-8650U’s 5,253, a delta of -82.4% for the Intel part.

Q: Does the i7-8650U have a higher boost clock than the EPYC 7601?

A: Yes, the i7-8650U boosts to 4.20 GHz while the EPYC 7601 boosts to 3.20 GHz, yet the EPYC still wins single-core benchmarks.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The i7-8650U has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the EPYC 7601 has 32 cores and 64 threads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD EPYC 7601 supports ECC memory; the Intel Core i7-8650U does not.

Q: Do both processors use the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both are built on a 14 nm process node, but the i7-8650U is made by Intel while the EPYC 7601 is made by GlobalFoundries.

The Verdict

The AMD EPYC 7601 is the clear performance winner in every benchmark category recorded. Its 32 cores and 64 threads deliver 82.4% higher scores than the i7-8650U across all six Cinebench tests, including single-core workloads where its lower boost clock might suggest a disadvantage. The EPYC 7601’s 64 MB L3 cache, eight-channel memory bus, and 170.6 GB/s bandwidth are specifications designed for server workloads, and the benchmark results confirm they deliver.

The Intel Core i7-8650U should be chosen only for scenarios where its 15 W TDP and integrated UHD 620 graphics are decisive factors. Its 4.20 GHz boost clock is higher than the EPYC 7601’s 3.20 GHz, but this does not translate into any benchmark win. The i7-8650U is a mobile processor with a 123 mm² die, while the EPYC 7601 is a server processor with a 213 mm² die and 4,800 million transistors.

For anyone comparing these two parts, the data provides a single answer: the EPYC 7601 outperforms the i7-8650U in every measured metric. The i7-8650U’s advantages are limited to power consumption, integrated graphics, and a higher boost clock that fails to produce competitive scores. The EPYC 7601 wins 6 out of 6 head-to-head benchmarks, and no workload in the data set favors the Intel chip. Choose the EPYC 7601 for performance; choose the i7-8650U only if the mobile form factor and low TDP are the primary requirements.