AMD EPYC 7702P vs Intel Core Ultra 5 134U Comparison

Intel Core Ultra 5 134U and AMD EPYC 7702P occupy opposite ends of the processor spectrum. The database records the Intel part as a 12-core mobile chip from the Core Ultra Series 1, while the AMD EPYC 7702P is a 64-core server/workstation processor from the EPYC 7002 series. Their benchmark profiles show a complete divergence in workload suitability, with the EPYC winning every recorded head-to-head test, but the Intel part holding its own in specific efficiency-oriented scenarios.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7702P wins every single benchmark recorded in the database. Across six Cinebench tests, the EPYC 7702P takes the victory in both multi-core and single-core workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 7702P scores 52308 against the Intel Core Ultra 5 134U’s 5572, a delta of -89.3%. The single-core Cinebench R23 result shows the EPYC at 7384 versus Intel’s 1576, a -78.7% delta. This means the EPYC 7702P is not merely ahead; it is massively ahead in every measured rendering and compute task.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 134U, however, has no benchmark wins in the head-to-head comparison. Its strengths lie elsewhere: the database lists its TDP at 9 watts, its market segment as Mobile, and its integrated graphics as Arc Xe-LPG 64EU. The EPYC 7702P has no integrated graphics and a 200-watt TDP. For workloads that prioritize low power draw, compact physical footprint, or built-in display output, the Intel part is the practical choice, even though it loses every compute benchmark. The data suggests a clear use-case split: raw throughput belongs to the EPYC, while mobility and power efficiency belong to the Intel.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is stark. The Intel Core Ultra 5 134U uses Meteor Lake, built on a 7 nm process by Intel. It has 12 cores and 14 threads, with a base clock of 700.00 MHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 112 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR5, dual-channel, with ECC not supported. PCIe is Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The chip is socketed in Intel BGA 2551 and was released on 2023-12-13.

The AMD EPYC 7702P uses Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Rome, also on a 7 nm process but fabricated by TSMC. It has 64 cores and 128 threads, with a base clock of 2000.00 MHz and a boost clock of 3.35 GHz. The cache is notably larger: 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 256 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR4, eight-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. ECC memory is supported. PCIe is Gen 4. The socket is AMD Socket SP3, and the release date was 2019-08-06. The transistor count is listed as 3,800 million, with a die size of 74 mm².

These differences explain the benchmark results. The EPYC’s 64 cores and 128 threads provide massive parallelism, while its 256 MB L3 cache reduces memory latency for large datasets. The Intel part’s 12 cores and 14 threads are far fewer, but its higher boost clock of 4.40 GHz versus the EPYC’s 3.35 GHz suggests a design aimed at responsive single-threaded tasks within a low power envelope. The EPYC’s eight-channel memory bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth dwarf the Intel’s dual-channel setup, which is critical for server workloads.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear verdict: the AMD EPYC 7702P is the superior processor for compute-heavy, multi-threaded, server-side workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 52308 is roughly 9.4 times higher than the Intel’s 5572. For single-core performance, the EPYC also leads, with 7384 versus 1576 in Cinebench R23 single-core. Anyone running rendering, scientific simulation, database queries, or virtualization should choose the EPYC 7702P based on these measurements.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 134U is the choice for mobile or power-constrained environments. Its 9-watt TDP and integrated Arc Xe-LPG graphics enable fanless or low-power designs that the EPYC cannot match. The EPYC’s 200-watt TDP requires substantial cooling and power delivery, making it unsuitable for laptops or compact devices. The Intel part’s dual-channel DDR5 support and Gen 4 PCIe with 8 lanes are adequate for thin-and-light notebooks, whereas the EPYC’s eight-channel DDR4 and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth are overkill for that role.

The percentile rankings reinforce the split: the Intel Core Ultra 5 134U sits at the 70th percentile among all CPUs, while the EPYC 7702P sits at the 69th percentile. Their average benchmark scores are 15910 for Intel and 15130 for AMD, which seems counterintuitive given the head-to-head results. This is because the database’s average score includes a broader set of benchmarks, such as PassMark tests where the Intel part has recorded scores for data compression (124771), encryption (8077), floating point math (32425), and integer math (51306). The EPYC has no PassMark entries, so its average is derived solely from Cinebench results. The head-to-head Cinebench data remains the authoritative comparison for these two specific processors.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD EPYC 7702P has 64 cores and 128 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 134U has 12 cores and 14 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 134U has a TDP of 9 watts, and the AMD EPYC 7702P has a TDP of 200 watts.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7702P supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 134U does not.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 134U has Arc Xe-LPG 64EU integrated graphics, and the AMD EPYC 7702P has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the EPYC 7702P?

A: The AMD EPYC 7702P has a memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, supported by an eight-channel DDR4 memory bus.

Q: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, what is the score difference?

A: The AMD EPYC 7702P scores 52308, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 134U scores 5572, a delta of -89.3% favoring the EPYC.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite reveals a one-sided contest. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7702P scores 5272 versus Intel’s 894, a delta of -83%. Single-core R15 shows the EPYC at 744 and Intel at 221, a -70.3% delta. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core result is 21969 for the EPYC and 4725 for Intel, a -78.5% delta. The R20 single-core test follows the same pattern: 3101 versus 666, again -78.5%. In Cinebench R23, the multi-core gap widens to -89.3% (52308 versus 5572), and single-core shows 7384 versus 1576, a -78.7% delta. The EPYC wins all six head-to-head tests, with the largest margin in R23 multi-core.

The Intel part’s best relative showing is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the delta is -70.3%, meaning the EPYC is still 3.4 times faster. The EPYC’s advantage grows with core count, as expected from a 64-core processor versus a 12-core one. For users focused on single-threaded responsiveness, the EPYC’s 3.35 GHz boost clock still outperforms the Intel’s 4.40 GHz boost clock in these benchmarks, indicating that the EPYC’s Zen 2 architecture delivers higher instructions per clock in this test environment.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification. The Intel Core Ultra 5 134U has 12 cores and 14 threads, while the AMD EPYC 7702P has 64 cores and 128 threads. Base clocks are 700.00 MHz versus 2000.00 MHz, and boost clocks are 4.40 GHz versus 3.35 GHz. TDP is 9 watts versus 200 watts. Sockets are Intel BGA 2551 versus AMD Socket SP3. Architecture is Meteor Lake versus Zen 2, with codenames Meteor Lake and Rome, respectively. Process nodes are both 7 nm, but the foundries differ: Intel for the Core Ultra, TSMC for the EPYC. L1 cache is 112 KB per core versus 96 KB per core; L2 is 2 MB per core versus 512 KB per core; L3 is 12 MB shared versus 256 MB shared. Memory support is DDR5 dual-channel versus DDR4 eight-channel, with the EPYC boasting 204.8 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support, while the Intel part lacks both. PCIe is Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only) versus Gen 4 without lane specification. Integrated graphics are present on Intel (Arc Xe-LPG 64EU) and absent on AMD. Market segments are Mobile versus Server/Workstation. Release dates are 2023-12-13 versus 2019-08-06. The Intel launch MSRP is $332, while the EPYC has no recorded launch MSRP. Transistor count and die size are only listed for the EPYC: 3,800 million transistors and 74 mm². The Intel part has no recorded values for those fields. The EPYC’s part number is 100-000000047, and the Intel’s is SRN84. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.