AMD EPYC 7702 vs Intel Core i5-1240U Comparison

The Intel Core i5-1240U and AMD EPYC 7702 occupy opposite ends of the computing spectrum, yet their average benchmark scores place them within 0.1% of each other. This statistical near-tie, however, masks a fundamental divergence in workload suitability. The data shows a 10-core mobile processor designed for efficiency and a 64-core server behemoth built for throughput, with the EPYC 7702 winning all six head-to-head comparisons by massive margins in raw compute, while the i5-1240U counters with a lower thermal envelope and integrated graphics.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7702 is the undisputed champion of multi-threaded and single-threaded rendering workloads. Across the entire Cinebench suite, it delivers staggering victories: 78.9% ahead in R15 multi-core, 79.6% ahead in R20 multi-core, and a crushing 86.5% advantage in R23 multi-core. Even in single-core tests, where the i5-1240U's 4.40 GHz boost clock might suggest competitiveness, the EPYC's 3.35 GHz boost still produces wins of 72.8% (R15), 79.6% (R20), and 81.1% (R23). The EPYC 7702's dominance is not marginal; it is categorical, reflecting its 64 cores and 128 threads versus the i5's 10 cores and 12 threads.

The Intel Core i5-1240U wins in scenarios where the EPYC 7702 cannot compete: power-constrained mobile computing. With a 9 W TDP versus the EPYC's 200 W TDP, the i5-1240U is designed for thin-and-light laptops, not server racks. It also includes integrated Iris Xe 80EU graphics, a feature entirely absent from the EPYC 7702, which has no integrated graphics. For tasks like office productivity, web browsing, or light content creation on battery power, the i5-1240U is the only viable option between these two. The data does not show the i5 winning any compute benchmark, but its existence as a mobile part with a 9 W TDP and iGPU makes it the clear choice for portable systems.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i5-1240U is built on Alder Lake architecture, using Intel's 10 nm process node, and features a hybrid configuration of 10 cores and 12 threads. It has a base clock of 1100 MHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, with a 12 MB shared L3 cache. Memory support includes both DDR4 and DDR5, running on a dual-channel bus, and it does not support ECC memory. The i5-1240U uses the Intel BGA 1781 socket, targets the mobile market segment, and was released in February 2022.

The AMD EPYC 7702, in contrast, is a server/workstation part built on Zen 2 architecture (codename Rome) using TSMC's 7 nm process node. It packs 64 cores and 128 threads, with a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 3.35 GHz. Its cache hierarchy is vastly different: 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and a massive 256 MB shared L3 cache. The EPYC supports only DDR4 memory but across an eight-channel bus, delivering 204.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth. It supports ECC memory, uses the AMD Socket SP3, and was released in August 2019. The EPYC 7702 also has significantly more transistors (3,800 million) and a larger die size (74 mm²) compared to the i5-1240U, which lacks published transistor and die size data. Both support PCIe Gen 4, but their target markets could not be more different: mobile versus server/workstation.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is a one-sided affair, with the AMD EPYC 7702 winning all six recorded comparisons. The largest victory comes in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the EPYC scores 58,539 against the i5-1240U's 7,902, a delta of -86.5% for the Intel part. This means the EPYC delivers roughly 7.4 times the multi-threaded rendering performance of the i5. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the EPYC's 24,586 score dwarfs the i5's 5,013, a 79.6% margin. The R15 multi-core test shows a similar pattern: 5,900 versus 1,242, a 78.9% gap.

Single-core results are equally lopsided, though the absolute scores are lower. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC scores 8,264 compared to the i5's 1,559, an 81.1% difference. The R20 single-core test shows 3,470 versus 707, a 79.6% gap, and R15 single-core shows 832 versus 226, a 72.8% margin. Even in the EPYC's weakest relative showing (R15 single-core), it still outperforms the i5 by nearly threefold. The data indicates that the EPYC 7702's higher base clock (2000 MHz vs 1100 MHz) and architectural efficiency overcome the i5's higher boost clock (4.40 GHz vs 3.35 GHz) in every measured scenario.

The average benchmark scores tell a different story. The i5-1240U has an average benchmark score of 16,957, while the EPYC 7702 sits at 16,932, a delta of just 0.1%. This near-identical average is misleading, as it reflects the i5's PassMark suite results (which include data compression, encryption, and integer math) that the EPYC lacks. The i5-1240U's PassMark multi-thread score is 13,406, with single-thread at 3,239, and it performs well in data compression (143,102) and integer math (44,968). However, these PassMark results do not appear in the head-to-head comparison, which relies solely on Cinebench tests.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7702 has 64 cores and 128 threads, while the Intel Core i5-1240U has 10 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the thermal design power (TDP) difference?

A: The Intel Core i5-1240U has a TDP of 9 W, while the AMD EPYC 7702 has a TDP of 200 W.

Q: Does the AMD EPYC 7702 have integrated graphics?

A: No, the EPYC 7702 has no integrated graphics. The Intel Core i5-1240U includes Iris Xe 80EU integrated graphics.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7702 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i5-1240U does not.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core i5-1240U has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD EPYC 7702 has 256 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What memory types does each support?

A: The Intel Core i5-1240U supports both DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus, while the AMD EPYC 7702 supports only DDR4 on an eight-channel bus.

The Verdict

The data makes the choice clear based on use case. The AMD EPYC 7702 is the pick for any workload that prioritizes raw compute performance, particularly multi-threaded rendering, scientific simulation, or server virtualization. Its 64 cores, 128 threads, and 256 MB L3 cache deliver performance that the i5-1240U cannot approach, as evidenced by the 86.5% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The EPYC also wins every single-core test, making it superior even for lightly threaded tasks, despite its lower boost clock. Its ECC memory support and 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth further cement its position for data-center and workstation deployments.

The Intel Core i5-1240U is the only rational choice for mobile computing. Its 9 W TDP makes it suitable for fanless or low-power laptops, and its integrated Iris Xe 80EU graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU. While it loses every compute benchmark to the EPYC, its purpose is not to compete on raw performance but to provide adequate processing in a power-constrained environment. For a user who needs a portable machine for everyday tasks, the i5-1240U is the appropriate selection; for anyone needing maximum throughput, the EPYC 7702 is the only option. The average benchmark scores may suggest parity, but the architecture, feature set, and head-to-head results show two processors with no true overlap in intended use.