AMD EPYC 7702 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 115U Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 5 115U and AMD EPYC 7702 occupy opposite ends of the computing spectrum, yet both sit at the 70th percentile in the benchmark database’s global ranking. That shared percentile hides a chasm in raw capability: the Ultra 5 115U is a 15W mobile processor built for thin-and-light laptops, while the EPYC 7702 is a 200W server chip with 64 cores. The data shows that the EPYC 7702 wins every head-to-head benchmark in the pack, but the Ultra 5 115U still holds value in its own context. This analysis breaks down where each processor wins, what separates them architecturally, and who should choose which.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7702 wins every single benchmark recorded in this comparison. Across six Cinebench tests—R15, R20, and R23, each in single-core and multi-core variants—the EPYC 7702 finishes ahead by 81.5% in every case. That uniform deltaPct is striking: it means the EPYC 7702’s advantage is not workload-specific but absolute. For multi-threaded rendering, scientific computing, or any task that scales across cores, the EPYC 7702’s 64 cores and 128 threads crush the Ultra 5 115U’s 8 cores and 10 threads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 7702 scores 58,539 versus 10,855 for the Intel chip—a gap of 47,684 points. Even in single-core tests, where the Ultra 5 115U’s higher boost clock of 4.20 GHz might suggest competitiveness, the EPYC 7702 still leads by the same 81.5% margin, scoring 8,264 versus 1,532 in Cinebench R23 single-core.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 115U’s wins are not in raw performance but in efficiency and integration. Its 15W TDP is a fraction of the EPYC 7702’s 200W TDP, making it suitable for passively cooled or fanless designs. It includes integrated graphics—Arc Xe-LPG 48EU—whereas the EPYC 7702 has none. The Ultra 5 115U also runs on DDR5 memory, while the EPYC 7702 uses DDR4. For a mobile user, the Ultra 5 115U’s PassMark scores show respectable single-thread performance: 3,057 in single-thread tests, with a multi-thread score of 13,024. Those numbers are competitive for a laptop chip in its class, but they are not in the same league as the EPYC 7702, which has no PassMark scores in the pack—only Cinebench results are available for the server part.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Core Ultra 5 115U is part of the Core Ultra Series 1, built on Meteor Lake architecture and manufactured on Intel’s 7 nm process. It uses a BGA 2049 socket and is classified as a mobile part. The AMD EPYC 7702 belongs to the EPYC 7002 series, uses Zen 2 architecture (codename Rome), and is fabricated by TSMC on a 7 nm process. Both use 7 nm nodes, but the foundries differ: Intel for the Ultra 5 115U, TSMC for the EPYC 7702. The EPYC 7702’s die is listed at 74 mm² with 3,800 million transistors; the Ultra 5 115U’s die size and transistor count are not provided.

Cache configurations diverge sharply. The Ultra 5 115U has 112 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 10 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC 7702 has 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 256 MB of shared L3 cache. That 256 MB L3 is 25.6 times larger than the Intel chip’s 10 MB, which helps explain the EPYC’s dominance in multi-threaded workloads that benefit from large on-die data storage. Memory support also differs: the Ultra 5 115U uses DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the EPYC 7702 uses DDR4 with an eight-channel bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. The EPYC 7702 supports ECC memory; the Ultra 5 115U does not. PCIe connectivity is Gen 4 on both, but the Ultra 5 115U lists 12 lanes (CPU only), while the EPYC 7702 lists no lane count.

The core counts tell the story: 8 cores and 10 threads on the Intel side versus 64 cores and 128 threads on the AMD side. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz for the Ultra 5 115U and 2.00 GHz for the EPYC 7702, but boost clocks favor Intel at 4.20 GHz versus 3.35 GHz. Despite the higher boost clock, the EPYC 7702’s single-core Cinebench scores are far higher, suggesting that the server chip’s Zen 2 cores are more efficient per clock or that the benchmark environment favors the EPYC. The market segments are clear: Mobile for Intel, Server/Workstation for AMD.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is unambiguous. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7702 scores 5,900 against the Ultra 5 115U’s 1,094—an 81.5% deficit for Intel. The single-core R15 test shows 832 versus 154, again an 81.5% gap. Moving to R20, the EPYC 7702 hits 24,586 in multi-core versus 4,559 for Intel; single-core shows 3,470 versus 643. In R23, the most demanding test, the EPYC 7702 posts 58,539 multi-core and 8,264 single-core, while the Ultra 5 115U manages 10,855 and 1,532 respectively. Every deltaPct is exactly -81.5%, meaning the EPYC 7702 is consistently about 5.4 times faster in these tests.

That consistency suggests the performance difference is structural, not workload-dependent. The EPYC 7702’s 64-core design provides massive parallel throughput, while its 256 MB L3 cache reduces memory latency in data-heavy tasks. The Ultra 5 115U’s higher boost clock does not compensate for fewer cores and a smaller cache. In PassMark tests, the Ultra 5 115U shows its strengths: data compression at 141,945, integer math at 41,043, floating-point math at 30,538, and single-thread performance at 3,057. No PassMark scores are listed for the EPYC 7702, so direct comparison in those workloads is not possible from this data.

The average benchmark scores in the database reflect the overall positioning: the Ultra 5 115U has an average score of 16,753, while the EPYC 7702 sits at 16,932—a difference of only 179 points. This near-parity in average score is misleading because the EPYC 7702’s average is based solely on its six Cinebench results, while the Intel chip includes 17 PassMark and Cinebench tests. The nearest rivals for the Ultra 5 115U include the Intel Core i5-1235U (deltaPct -0.1) and AMD Ryzen 3 7335U (deltaPct -0.4), showing it is closely matched with mainstream mobile chips. The EPYC 7702’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-1240U (deltaPct -0.1) and AMD EPYC 7742 (deltaPct -0.4), which is remarkable: a server CPU is benchmarked against laptop processors in this database, reflecting the percentile methodology rather than real-world competition.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7702 is dramatically faster. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 58,539 versus 10,855 for the Intel Core Ultra 5 115U, an 81.5% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel chip have any performance advantage?

A: No. The EPYC 7702 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests by the same 81.5% margin. The Ultra 5 115U has no benchmark wins in this comparison.

Q: What about single-core performance?

A: The EPYC 7702 still leads. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 8,264 versus 1,532 for the Ultra 5 115U. The Intel chip’s higher boost clock (4.20 GHz versus 3.35 GHz) does not translate into a win.

Q: Can the Ultra 5 115U be used in a server?

A: No. It is a mobile processor with a BGA 2049 socket, 15W TDP, and no ECC memory support. The EPYC 7702 is a server/workstation part with SP3 socket and ECC support.

Q: How do their memory systems compare?

A: The Ultra 5 115U uses DDR5 with dual-channel and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The EPYC 7702 uses DDR4 with eight-channel and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: Yes. Both are listed as Active in production status, despite the EPYC 7702 being released in August 2019 and the Ultra 5 115U in December 2023.

The Verdict

The data makes the choice straightforward for raw performance: the AMD EPYC 7702 is the clear winner in every measured benchmark. Its 64 cores, 128 threads, and 256 MB L3 cache deliver 81.5% higher scores in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core. Anyone needing maximum throughput for rendering, simulation, or virtualization should pick the EPYC 7702 without hesitation. Its eight-channel DDR4 memory with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support make it a proper server platform.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 115U wins on integration and power envelope. At 15W TDP, it is designed for laptops where battery life and thermals matter more than absolute compute. Its integrated Arc Xe-LPG graphics and DDR5 support make it a modern mobile solution. The PassMark results—141,945 in data compression, 41,043 in integer math, 30,538 in floating-point math—show it handles everyday productivity and light creative tasks well. For a mobile user who needs a capable chip that sips power, the Ultra 5 115U is the only viable choice here, as the EPYC 7702’s 200W TDP and lack of integrated graphics disqualify it from portable use.

The verdict is not about which CPU is better in absolute terms, but which fits the use case. The EPYC 7702 is a server heavyweight; the Ultra 5 115U is a mobile efficiency part. Both are active in production, but they serve entirely different markets. If the workload is server-side and multi-threaded, the EPYC 7702 is the only option. If the task is a laptop, the Ultra 5 115U is the only option because the EPYC 7702 cannot be installed in a mobile chassis.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 5 115U | AMD EPYC 7702 |

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

| Cores | 8 | 64 |

| Threads | 10 | 128 |

| Base Clock | 1500.00 MHz | 2000.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.20 GHz | 3.35 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 200 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 2049 | AMD Socket SP3 |

| Architecture | Meteor Lake | Zen 2 |

| Codename | Meteor Lake | Rome |

| Process Node | 7 nm (Intel) | 7 nm (TSMC) |

| L1 Cache | 112 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 10 MB (shared) | 256 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 204.8 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 12 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4 |

| Integrated Graphics | Arc Xe-LPG 48EU | None |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | 2023-12-13 | 2019-08-06 |

| Transistors | Not listed | 3,800 million |

| Die Size | Not listed | 74 mm² |

| Part Number | SRN6F | 100-000000038 |