AMD EPYC 7742 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 164U Comparison

The Verdict

This comparison is not a duel; it is a category mismatch. The Intel Core Ultra 7 164U is a 9W mobile processor built for battery efficiency and light workloads. The AMD EPYC 7742 is a 225W server CPU designed for massive parallel throughput. The benchmark data is unambiguous: the EPYC 7742 wins all 6 head-to-head tests, with victories ranging from 73.1% to 85.1% deltas. If your workload is heavily threaded rendering, virtualization, or data-center compute, the EPYC 7742 is the only rational choice. The Core Ultra 7 164U is for a thin-and-light laptop where the priority is fitting into a 9W thermal envelope and still running everyday tasks. The data shows zero wins for the Intel part in any shared benchmark, so there is no scenario where the Ultra 7 outperforms the EPYC 7742 on raw performance. However, the Intel part's integrated Arc Xe-LPG 64EU graphics and mobile segment positioning mean it can serve in a portable system where the EPYC 7742 physically cannot exist.

Architecture Differences

The Core Ultra 7 164U uses Intel's Meteor Lake architecture on a 7nm process fabricated by Intel, while the EPYC 7742 uses AMD's Zen 2 architecture on a 7nm process fabricated by TSMC. The transistor counts and die sizes are starkly different: the EPYC 7742 packs 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die, while the Intel part does not list these figures — but the core count tells the story. The EPYC 7742 has 64 cores and 128 threads; the Ultra 7 164U has 12 cores and 14 threads. The cache hierarchy is a major divide. Intel provides 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. AMD offers 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 256 MB of shared L3. That 256 MB L3 is a server-grade advantage for large working sets. Memory support also diverges: the Intel part uses DDR5 (capacity depends on motherboard) with a dual-channel bus and no ECC, while the EPYC 7742 uses DDR4 with an eight-channel bus and a specified 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth, plus ECC support. The Intel chip has integrated Arc Xe-LPG 64EU graphics; the EPYC 7742 has none. The Ultra 7 164U's socket is Intel BGA 2551 (mobile), while the EPYC 7742 uses AMD Socket SP3 (server). The EPYC 7742 also supports PCIe Gen 4 across the board, whereas the Intel part's PCIe is limited to Gen 4 with only 8 lanes from the CPU. The production status for both is Active. The Intel part launched on 2023-12-13, the AMD part on 2019-08-06.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The EPYC 7742 dominates every single head-to-head test. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the EPYC scores 5923 against the Ultra 7's 1304, a delta of -78% for the Intel part. Single-core R15 is closer in percentage but still a clear AMD win: 836 versus 225, a -73.1% delta. Moving to Cinebench R20, the gap widens. Multicore shows 24682 for AMD versus 4488 for Intel, an -81.8% delta. Single-core R20 mirrors that exact -81.8% delta, with scores of 3484 and 633. In Cinebench R23, the most demanding of the set, the EPYC 7742 posts 58769 multicore versus 8766 for the Ultra 7, a staggering -85.1% delta. Even in R23 single-core, where Intel's boost clock of 4.80 GHz should help, the AMD part wins 8296 against 1590, an -80.8% delta. The pattern is consistent: the EPYC 7742's 64-core count overwhelms the Ultra 7's 12 cores in every scenario, including single-threaded tests where the Intel part's higher boost clock does not compensate for the architectural efficiency of Zen 2. The Intel part's highest relative performance is in R15 single-core, where it trails by only 73.1% — still a decisive loss. The head-to-head tally is 0 wins for Intel and 6 for AMD.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 7 164U | AMD EPYC 7742 |

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

| Cores | 12 | 64 |

| Threads | 14 | 128 |

| Base Clock | 1100.00 MHz | 2.25 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| TDP | 9 W | 225 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 2551 | AMD Socket SP3 |

| Architecture | Meteor Lake | Zen 2 (Rome) |

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

| Transistors | Not listed | 3,800 million |

| Die Size | Not listed | 74 mm² |

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

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

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 256 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 (depends on motherboard) | DDR4 |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | Not listed | 204.8 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 8 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4 |

| Integrated Graphics | Arc Xe-LPG 64EU | None |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

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

| Launch MSRP | $448 | Not listed |

| Part Number | SRN85 | 100-000000053 |

FAQ

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

A: The AMD EPYC 7742. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 58769 versus the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U's 8766, an 85.1% lead for AMD.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U win any benchmark against the EPYC 7742?

A: No. The data shows 0 wins for Intel across all 6 head-to-head tests, with AMD winning by deltas ranging from -73.1% to -85.1%.

Q: Is the EPYC 7742 better for single-threaded tasks despite its lower boost clock?

A: Yes. The EPYC 7742 has a 3.40 GHz boost clock versus 4.80 GHz for the Ultra 7, yet still wins Cinebench R23 single-core with 8296 against 1590, an -80.8% delta.

Q: What are the cache differences and why do they matter?

A: The EPYC 7742 has 256 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to 12 MB on the Ultra 7 164U. The EPYC also has 512 KB L2 per core versus 2 MB per core on Intel, but the massive L3 advantage is critical for server workloads with large datasets.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD EPYC 7742 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 7 164U does not.

Q: Can the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U be used in a server motherboard?

A: No. It uses Intel BGA 2551, a mobile socket, and its PCIe is limited to 8 Gen 4 lanes from the CPU. The EPYC 7742 uses AMD Socket SP3 and supports Gen 4 PCIe across the board.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7742 wins every measurable performance category in the data. For multi-threaded rendering, the Cinebench R20 and R23 multicore results (24682 and 58769, respectively) are roughly 5.5x and 6.7x higher than the Intel part. For any server workload involving large cached datasets, the 256 MB L3 cache is a decisive advantage. The EPYC 7742 also supports eight-channel DDR4 memory with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, making it suitable for memory-bandwidth-sensitive applications. Its ECC support is mandatory for data integrity in server environments. The EPYC 7742's 64 cores and 128 threads dominate in virtualization, database processing, and scientific computing where parallel scaling is the norm.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 164U wins in no benchmark, but it wins in physical and power constraints. Its 9W TDP is a fraction of the EPYC 7742's 225W, enabling fanless or ultra-thin mobile designs. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG 64EU graphics provide display output and basic acceleration without a discrete GPU — something the EPYC 7742 cannot do (it has no integrated graphics). The Ultra 7 164U's boost clock of 4.80 GHz is higher than the EPYC's 3.40 GHz, though this does not translate to a single-core win in the data. Its 14 threads and 12 MB L3 are sufficient for everyday productivity, web browsing, and light content creation. The mobile socket (BGA 2551) and DDR5 support (depending on motherboard) make it a fit for thin laptops where the EPYC 7742 physically cannot be installed. In short, the EPYC 7742 is for compute density; the Ultra 7 164U is for energy efficiency and portability. The data gives the EPYC 7742 a clean sweep on performance, but the Intel part's existence in the mobile segment fills a role the server chip cannot.