AMD EPYC 7742 vs Intel Core i5-11400 Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Core i5-11400 and AMD EPYC 7742 occupy opposite ends of the computing spectrum, and the benchmark data makes that division brutally clear. The EPYC 7742 wins every single head-to-head benchmark in the entire fact pack, taking all six Cinebench tests with a consistent 76% advantage over the i5-11400. That is not a close contest; that is a category difference.

The i5-11400 is a 6-core, 12-thread desktop processor built for mainstream systems. Its data shows a processor that competes in the same average benchmark neighborhood as the EPYC 7742 despite having 58 fewer cores — both sit at essentially the same average benchmark score, with the Intel at 17,067 and the AMD at 16,998. This happens because the i5 has a much higher boost clock (4.40 GHz vs 3.40 GHz) and the benchmark averages are pulled down by the EPYC's weaker single-thread showing relative to its massive core count.

The EPYC 7742 is a server/workstation part with 64 cores and 128 threads. Its data shows overwhelming dominance in multi-threaded workloads, with Cinebench R23 multi-core scores hitting 58,769 versus 14,132 for the i5-11400. This is the processor you pick when core count matters more than anything else.

The verdict from the data: choose the i5-11400 if you need a desktop processor with decent single-thread performance, integrated graphics, and a 65W TDP. Choose the EPYC 7742 if you need massive parallel throughput for server-style workloads, and you have the power budget for a 225W TDP. There is no crossover where both make sense.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 7742 wins in every measured multi-core scenario. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 5,923 versus 1,424 — a 76% delta. R20 multi-core is 24,682 versus 5,935. R23 multi-core is 58,769 versus 14,132. These are not marginal wins; the EPYC is consistently about four times faster in multi-threaded Cinebench runs.

The EPYC also wins single-core tests, though the margin is the same 76% delta. Cinebench R15 single-core: 836 versus 200. R20 single-core: 3,484 versus 837. R23 single-core: 8,296 versus 1,995. The data shows the EPYC's single-core performance is also far ahead, which is surprising given its much lower boost clock of 3.40 GHz versus the i5's 4.40 GHz. This suggests the Zen 2 architecture delivers more instructions per clock than Rocket Lake in these specific tests.

The i5-11400 does not win a single head-to-head benchmark in the fact pack. However, its data shows it has strengths outside the Cinebench suite. The i5 has integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 730), which the EPYC lacks entirely. It also has a much lower TDP at 65W versus 225W, making it viable for standard desktop cooling solutions. The i5's boost clock of 4.40 GHz is higher, and its 3DMark scores show reasonable thread scaling from 865 single-thread to 5,630 max-threads.

For real-world use, the data indicates the i5-11400 is for desktop productivity, light gaming, and general-purpose computing where single-thread responsiveness and low power matter. The EPYC 7742 is for virtualization, database workloads, scientific computing, and any task that can use 128 threads — and the benchmark data shows it crushes those workloads.

Architecture Differences

The i5-11400 uses Intel's Rocket Lake architecture on a 14 nm process node, fabricated by Intel itself. It has a die size of 276 mm². The EPYC 7742 uses AMD's Zen 2 architecture (codenamed Rome) on a 7 nm process from TSMC, with a die size of just 74 mm². The EPYC packs 3,800 million transistors into that smaller die, while the i5's transistor count is not listed.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The i5 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The EPYC has 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 256 MB of shared L3 — over 21 times the L3 cache of the i5.

Memory support also diverges. Both support DDR4, but the i5 uses a dual-channel memory bus with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support. The EPYC uses an eight-channel memory bus with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth and full ECC support. That is four times the memory bandwidth.

PCIe support differs as well. The i5 has Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the EPYC also has Gen 4 but the lane count is not specified in the data. The i5 includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 730); the EPYC has none.

The i5 is a desktop part with a 65W TDP, while the EPYC is a server/workstation part with a 225W TDP. The i5 was released on 2021-03-15 and is end-of-life; the EPYC was released on 2019-08-06 and is still active. The i5 has a launch MSRP of $182; the EPYC has no listed launch MSRP.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD EPYC 7742 is dramatically faster. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 58,769 versus 14,132 for the i5-11400, a 76% advantage. The same 76% delta appears in R15 and R20 multi-core tests.

Q: Does the Intel i5-11400 beat the EPYC 7742 in any benchmark?

A: No. In the head-to-head benchmark data, the EPYC 7742 wins all six Cinebench tests (R15, R20, and R23, both single and multi-core). The i5 wins zero head-to-head tests.

Q: Why do the two processors have similar average benchmark scores?

A: The i5-11400 has an average benchmark score of 17,067 and the EPYC 7742 has 16,998 — nearly identical. This is because the average includes many different tests, and the i5's higher boost clock (4.40 GHz) helps it in single-thread and lighter workloads, while the EPYC's 64 cores dominate heavily multi-threaded tests but don't help in short single-thread runs.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7742 supports ECC memory. The Intel i5-11400 does not list ECC support.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences?

A: The EPYC 7742 has 204.8 GB/s bandwidth over an eight-channel memory bus. The i5-11400 has 51.2 GB/s over a dual-channel bus. That is a four-fold difference in memory bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel i5-11400 includes UHD Graphics 730. The AMD EPYC 7742 has no integrated graphics listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is remarkably one-sided. The EPYC 7742 wins all six Cinebench comparisons, and every single win shows a delta of approximately -76% (meaning the i5 scores 76% lower).

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC scores 5,923 against the i5's 1,424. That is 4,499 points of absolute difference, which translates to the i5 delivering only about a quarter of the EPYC's performance. The R15 single-core test shows 836 versus 200 — again, the i5 is roughly a quarter of the EPYC's score.

Cinebench R20 multi-core: EPYC 24,682, i5 5,935. The EPYC more than quadruples the i5's output. R20 single-core: EPYC 3,484, i5 837. Same pattern.

Cinebench R23 multi-core is the biggest absolute gap: EPYC 58,769 versus i5 14,132. That 44,637-point difference represents the largest single benchmark margin in the data. R23 single-core: EPYC 8,296 versus i5 1,995.

The consistency of the -76% delta across all six tests is striking. Whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded, the EPYC 7742 maintains the same proportional advantage. This suggests the Zen 2 architecture's per-core efficiency, combined with its 7 nm process, gives it a fundamental performance edge that clock speed alone cannot close for the i5.

The i5's 4.40 GHz boost clock is 1 GHz higher than the EPYC's 3.40 GHz, yet the i5 still loses single-core tests by the same 76% margin. This indicates the EPYC's per-core IPC is substantially higher in these Cinebench workloads, despite the lower clock speed.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification category. Core count: 6 for the i5, 64 for the EPYC. Threads: 12 versus 128. Base clock: 2.60 GHz versus 2.25 GHz. Boost clock: 4.40 GHz versus 3.40 GHz. TDP: 65W versus 225W.

Socket: Intel Socket 1200 versus AMD Socket SP3. Architecture: Rocket Lake versus Zen 2. Process node: 14 nm versus 7 nm. Foundry: Intel versus TSMC. Die size: 276 mm² versus 74 mm². Transistors: not listed for the i5, 3,800 million for the EPYC.

Cache: L1 is 80 KB per core for the i5 versus 96 KB per core for the EPYC. L2 is 512 KB per core for both. L3 is 12 MB shared for the i5 versus 256 MB shared for the EPYC — a 21-fold difference.

Memory: both support DDR4, but the i5 uses dual-channel with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the EPYC uses eight-channel with 204.8 GB/s. ECC: false for the i5, true for the EPYC.

PCIe: the i5 has Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only); the EPYC has Gen 4 with no lane count specified. Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 730 for the i5, none for the EPYC.

Market segment: Desktop for the i5, Server/Workstation for the EPYC. Production status: end-of-life for the i5, active for the EPYC. Release date: 2021-03-15 for the i5, 2019-08-06 for the EPYC. Launch MSRP: $182 for the i5, none listed for the EPYC. Both have locked multipliers. Part numbers: SRKP0 for the i5, 100-000000053 for the EPYC.

The percentile rankings are close — the i5 sits at 71st percentile of all CPUs, the EPYC at 70th — which reflects their similar average benchmark scores despite completely different design philosophies.