AMD EPYC 7D12 vs Intel Core i7-6700 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database records six shared tests between the Intel Core i7-6700 and the AMD EPYC 7D12. The AMD EPYC 7D12 wins all six, with the Intel part trailing by roughly 81% in every category. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC scores 3675 against the i7-6700's 688, a deficit of 81.3%. The single-core R15 result follows the same pattern: 518 for the EPYC versus 96 for the Intel, again an 81.5% gap. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core test shows 15315 for the EPYC and 2867 for the i7-6700, with the delta holding at 81.3%. The R20 single-core result is 2162 against 404, also 81.3%.

Cinebench R23 continues the trend. In multi-core, the EPYC 7D12 posts 36465 while the i7-6700 manages 6828, an 81.3% difference. Single-core R23 shows 5148 for the EPYC versus 964 for the Intel, again 81.3%. The consistency of these margins is striking. Every single-core test shows the EPYC ahead by the same proportion as the multi-core tests, which suggests the performance gap is not simply a matter of core count. The EPYC 7D12's advantage appears across both single-threaded and heavily threaded workloads.

The recorded data also includes average benchmark scores that place both processors near the same overall percentile. The i7-6700 has an average benchmark score of 11074, while the EPYC 7D12 records 10547. Despite the EPYC's dominance in the head-to-head Cinebench tests, the aggregate average across all benchmarks in the database puts the two parts within a few points of each other. The i7-6700 sits at the 66th percentile among all CPUs, and the EPYC 7D12 also sits at the 66th percentile. This indicates that the database includes many other workloads where the Intel part performs relatively better, even though it loses every shared Cinebench test by a wide margin.

The nearest rivals in the database reinforce this picture. For the i7-6700, the closest competitors by average score include the AMD EPYC 9224 at 11118 (0.4% ahead), the AMD EPYC 7542 at 11152 (0.7% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 5 3500U at 11176 (0.9% ahead), and the Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y at 11191 (1% ahead). For the EPYC 7D12, the nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-4790 at 10556 (0.1% ahead), the AMD EPYC 7502P at 10512 (0.3% behind), the Intel Xeon W-3175X at 10369 (1.7% behind), and the Intel Xeon Gold 6338N at 10347 (1.9% behind). The i7-6700's average score is actually slightly higher than the EPYC's, yet the head-to-head results show no contest.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split between these two parts is substantial. The Intel Core i7-6700 uses the Skylake architecture on a 14 nm process fabricated by Intel, while the AMD EPYC 7D12 uses Zen 2 (codename Rome) on a 7 nm process from TSMC. The EPYC packs 32 cores and 64 threads, compared to the i7-6700's 4 cores and 8 threads. The EPYC's base clock is recorded as 1100.00 MHz with a boost clock of 3.00 GHz, while the i7-6700 runs at 3.40 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost. The Intel part has a 65 W TDP, the EPYC has an 85 W TDP.

Cache configurations differ sharply. Both have 64 KB of L1 per core, but the L2 cache on the i7-6700 is 256 KB per core versus 512 KB per core on the EPYC 7D12. The L3 cache is where the gap becomes pronounced: the i7-6700 has 8 MB shared, while the EPYC 7D12 has 32 MB per die and a total of 128 MB. The EPYC also reports 15,200 million transistors across four 74 mm² dies, while the Intel part does not have transistor or die size figures in the database.

Memory support also separates the two. The i7-6700 supports DDR3 and DDR4 with a dual-channel memory bus and 34.1 GB/s bandwidth, and it does not support ECC. The EPYC 7D12 supports DDR4 only, with an eight-channel memory bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, and it does support ECC. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the i7-6700 provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the EPYC 7D12 provides Gen 4 with 128 lanes. The Intel part includes integrated HD Graphics 530, while the EPYC has no integrated graphics. The i7-6700 is a desktop part, already end-of-life, while the EPYC is an active server/workstation processor.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 7D12 wins every recorded head-to-head test, and the margins are so consistent that the outcome is unambiguous for Cinebench workloads. The EPYC's 32 cores and 64 threads provide a massive advantage in multi-threaded rendering, and the single-core results also favor the EPYC despite its much lower base clock. The EPYC's 3.00 GHz boost clock clearly outperforms the i7-6700's 4.00 GHz boost in these specific tests, indicating that architectural efficiency and cache size matter more than raw clock speed in the recorded data.

The i7-6700, however, holds its own in the broader database. Its average benchmark score of 11074 is actually higher than the EPYC's 10547. The Intel part's nearest rivals include server-class EPYC and Xeon parts with similar average scores, which suggests that the i7-6700 excels in workloads that are not captured by the Cinebench suite. The database includes PassMark tests for the i7-6700, such as data compression at 113748, data encryption at 2753, extended instructions at 7505, and find prime numbers at 27. These results indicate strong performance in specific integer and encryption tasks, though no comparable PassMark scores are recorded for the EPYC 7D12 in the head-to-head set.

For single-threaded responsiveness, the i7-6700's 4.00 GHz boost clock and Skylake architecture should be considered, but the recorded Cinebench single-core scores show the EPYC ahead by 81.3%. The EPYC's 5148 in R23 single-core dwarfs the i7-6700's 964. The data does not support a scenario where the i7-6700 wins any of the shared tests.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification field. The i7-6700 has 4 cores and 8 threads; the EPYC 7D12 has 32 cores and 64 threads. Base clocks are 3.40 GHz versus 1100.00 MHz, and boost clocks are 4.00 GHz versus 3.00 GHz. TDP is 65 W versus 85 W. The socket is Intel Socket 1151 for the i7-6700 and AMD Socket SP3 for the EPYC. The i7-6700 uses Skylake on 14 nm; the EPYC uses Zen 2 on 7 nm. The foundry is Intel versus TSMC. The EPYC reports 15,200 million transistors and 4x 74 mm² die size; the i7-6700 has no transistor or die size data.

L1 cache is the same at 64 KB per core, but L2 cache is 256 KB per core on the Intel versus 512 KB per core on the AMD. L3 cache is 8 MB shared on the i7-6700 versus 32 MB per die (128 MB total) on the EPYC. Memory support: the i7-6700 accepts DDR3 and DDR4 with dual-channel bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s; the EPYC accepts DDR4 only with eight-channel bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. ECC is absent on the i7-6700 and present on the EPYC. PCIe is Gen 3 with 16 lanes versus Gen 4 with 128 lanes. The i7-6700 has integrated HD Graphics 530; the EPYC has none. The i7-6700 is a desktop part with an end-of-life status and a launch MSRP of $303; the EPYC is an active server/workstation part with no launch MSRP recorded. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The AMD EPYC 7D12 wins all six recorded head-to-head tests, with the Intel Core i7-6700 trailing by 81.3% in most cases and 81.5% in one.

Q: How does the core count compare between the two?

A: The i7-6700 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the EPYC 7D12 has 32 cores and 64 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The i7-6700 has a dual-channel memory bus with 34.1 GB/s bandwidth, while the EPYC 7D12 has an eight-channel memory bus with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the EPYC 7D12 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the EPYC 7D12 supports ECC memory, while the i7-6700 does not.

Q: Are these processors in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both are recorded at the 66th percentile among all CPUs, though the i7-6700 has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 11074 versus 10547 for the EPYC.

Q: What is the integrated graphics situation?

A: The i7-6700 includes HD Graphics 530, while the EPYC 7D12 has no integrated graphics.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear choice for anyone running Cinebench workloads: the AMD EPYC 7D12 is the superior processor. It beats the Intel Core i7-6700 by roughly 81% in every shared test, across both single-core and multi-core scenarios. The EPYC's 32 cores, 64 threads, 128 MB of L3 cache, and eight-channel memory bandwidth make it the obvious pick for server and workstation tasks that stress parallel execution and memory throughput. The i7-6700 cannot compete in these measurements, despite its higher boost clock and lower TDP.

However, the aggregate database tells a more nuanced story. The i7-6700's average benchmark score of 11074 is higher than the EPYC's 10547, and both sit at the same 66th percentile. The i7-6700's nearest rivals include AMD EPYC 9224 and Intel Xeon Gold 6336Y, which suggests that the desktop part remains competitive in mixed workloads beyond Cinebench. The i7-6700 also has integrated graphics, DDR3 support, and a 65 W TDP, making it a practical choice for a desktop system where discrete graphics and massive core counts are unnecessary.

For users who need maximum multi-threaded rendering performance, ECC memory support, Gen 4 PCIe with 128 lanes, and server-grade reliability, the EPYC 7D12 is the only rational choice from the recorded data. For users who prioritize lower power consumption, integrated graphics, and broad memory compatibility in a desktop context, the i7-6700 has merits, though it loses every head-to-head benchmark. The verdict depends entirely on workload. The data shows the EPYC 7D12 as the performance leader in all shared tests, while the i7-6700 holds a slight edge in the overall average benchmark score. Choose the EPYC for raw compute and the i7-6700 for general-purpose desktop use where its specific strengths apply.