AMD EPYC 7H12 vs Intel Core i3-12100E Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep for the AMD EPYC 7H12 across all six shared Cinebench tests. In the R15 suite, the EPYC 7H12 scores 5,965 in multi-core against 1,164 for the Intel Core i3-12100E, a 412.5% advantage. The single-core R15 result follows the same pattern: 842 versus 164, a 413.4% delta. These are not marginal gaps; they represent a processor operating in a different performance class entirely.

Moving to R20, the EPYC 7H12 records 24,858 multi-core points while the i3-12100E manages 4,854, a 412.1% difference. The single-core R20 test shows 3,509 against 685, a 412.3% delta. The R23 results continue the trend: 59,188 multi-core versus 11,559, a 412.1% gap, and 8,355 single-core versus 1,631, a 412.3% difference.

What stands out in this data is the consistency of the margins. Every delta falls between 412.1% and 413.4%, regardless of the test generation or whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded. This uniformity suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-dependent. The EPYC 7H12 wins all six head-to-head matchups, with the i3-12100E recording zero victories.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this hierarchy, though the gap narrows considerably. The EPYC 7H12 posts an average score of 17,120, while the i3-12100E averages 16,853. The EPYC 7H12 sits at the 71st percentile of all CPUs in the database, with the i3-12100E close behind at the 70th percentile. The nearest rivals for the EPYC 7H12 include the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U at 17,074 (0.3% behind) and the AMD EPYC 7573X at 17,070 (0.3% behind). The i3-12100E's closest competitors include the AMD Ryzen 3 7335U at 16,827 (0.2% ahead) and the AMD Ryzen 5 7235HS at 16,902 (0.3% behind).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD EPYC 7H12 is built on the Zen 2 architecture with the Rome codename, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 64 cores and 128 threads, a configuration aimed squarely at server and workstation workloads. The Intel Core i3-12100E uses the Alder Lake architecture with the Alder Lake-S codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel, with 4 cores and 8 threads for desktop use.

Cache hierarchies diverge sharply. The EPYC 7H12 carries 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 256 MB of shared L3 cache. The i3-12100E has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The EPYC's L3 cache is 21 times larger in total, a critical factor for data-center workloads that repeatedly access large datasets. The i3-12100E compensates with a larger per-core L2 allocation, but the aggregate cache capacity favors the EPYC decisively.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The i3-12100E runs at 3.20 GHz base and boosts to 4.20 GHz, while the EPYC 7H12 operates at 2.60 GHz base and 3.30 GHz boost. The Intel part has higher clocks, but the EPYC's core count overwhelms that advantage in throughput. The die sizes reflect the different manufacturing approaches: the EPYC 7H12 measures 74 mm² with 3,800 million transistors, while the i3-12100E spans 163 mm². The EPYC's smaller die despite vastly more cores speaks to the density of the 7 nm process.

Memory support differs at the platform level. The EPYC 7H12 uses DDR4 across an eight-channel memory bus with 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The i3-12100E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, though the database does not list a bandwidth figure for it. ECC memory is supported on the EPYC 7H12 but not on the i3-12100E. PCIe capabilities also differ: the EPYC 7H12 offers Gen 4, while the i3-12100E provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU.

The EPYC 7H12 includes no integrated graphics, which is typical for server processors. The i3-12100E includes UHD Graphics 730, making it a self-contained desktop solution. The EPYC 7H12 uses AMD Socket SP3, while the i3-12100E uses Intel Socket 1700. The i3-12100E has a launch MSRP of $125, which can be stated once as a reference point. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data points to a clear division of labor. The EPYC 7H12 wins every Cinebench test in the head-to-head comparison, from single-core R15 at 842 points to multi-core R23 at 59,188 points. Its 64 cores and 128 threads make it the obvious choice for heavily parallel workloads: rendering, scientific computing, virtualization, and database serving. The 412% margins in multi-core tests reflect what happens when a workload can scale across 128 threads instead of 8.

The i3-12100E, despite losing every head-to-head matchup, has its own domain. Its higher base and boost clocks (3.20 GHz and 4.20 GHz versus 2.60 GHz and 3.30 GHz) make it a reasonable fit for lightly threaded desktop tasks where per-core responsiveness matters more than aggregate throughput. The integrated UHD Graphics 730 eliminates the need for a discrete GPU in basic desktop systems. Its dual-channel memory support and DDR4/DDR5 compatibility offer platform flexibility, and its 60 W TDP places it in an entirely different power class than the EPYC 7H12 at 280 W.

The database also includes additional PassMark and GeekBench results for the i3-12100E that were not run on the EPYC 7H12. These include a GeekBench multi-core score of 7,661 and single-core of 2,202, a PassMark multi-thread score of 14,271, and a PassMark single-thread score of 3,438. The i3-12100E also records specialized scores in data compression (160,112), data encryption (8,069), extended instructions (10,814), prime number finding (63), floating point math (31,919), integer math (40,885), physics (1,185), and random string sorting (16,089). These figures give a fuller picture of the i3-12100E's desktop-oriented capabilities, though the EPYC 7H12 was not subjected to the same test battery.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmarks in the head-to-head comparison?

A: The AMD EPYC 7H12 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, covering R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core modes. The Intel Core i3-12100E records zero wins.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap in R23?

A: The EPYC 7H12 scores 59,188 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the i3-12100E scores 11,559. This represents a 412.1% advantage for the EPYC 7H12.

Q: Does the i3-12100E win any single-core tests?

A: No. Despite higher clock speeds (4.20 GHz boost versus 3.30 GHz boost), the i3-12100E loses every single-core Cinebench test. In R23 single-core, the EPYC 7H12 scores 8,355 versus 1,631 for the i3-12100E, a 412.3% difference.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD EPYC 7H12 has 64 cores and 128 threads. The Intel Core i3-12100E has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes for the EPYC 7H12, which supports ECC memory. No for the i3-12100E, which does not list ECC support.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i3-12100E includes UHD Graphics 730. The AMD EPYC 7H12 has no integrated graphics.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification category. The EPYC 7H12 offers 64 cores and 128 threads versus 4 cores and 8 threads for the i3-12100E. Base clocks run 2.60 GHz on the EPYC versus 3.20 GHz on the i3-12100E; boost clocks run 3.30 GHz versus 4.20 GHz. TDP differs substantially: 280 W for the EPYC 7H12, 60 W for the i3-12100E.

The sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket SP3 on the EPYC 7H12, Intel Socket 1700 on the i3-12100E. Architectures diverge with Zen 2 (Rome) against Alder Lake (Alder Lake-S). Process nodes are 7 nm from TSMC for the EPYC, 10 nm from Intel for the i3-12100E. The EPYC 7H12 has 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die; the i3-12100E has no transistor count listed and a 163 mm² die.

Cache configurations differ at every level: L1 is 96 KB per core on the EPYC versus 80 KB per core on the i3-12100E; L2 is 512 KB per core versus 1.25 MB per core; L3 is 256 MB shared versus 12 MB shared. Memory support shows DDR4 on the EPYC versus DDR4 and DDR5 on the i3-12100E. Memory buses are eight-channel versus dual-channel. The EPYC 7H12 lists 204.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth; the i3-12100E has no bandwidth figure. ECC memory is supported only on the EPYC. PCIe generations differ: Gen 4 on the EPYC, Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes on the i3-12100E. Integrated graphics appear only on the i3-12100E with UHD Graphics 730. Market segments are Server/Workstation for the EPYC and Desktop for the i3-12100E. Release dates are September 17, 2019 for the EPYC 7H12 and January 3, 2022 for the i3-12100E. The i3-12100E has a launch MSRP of $125; the EPYC 7H12 has no listed launch MSRP.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion. The AMD EPYC 7H12 is the choice for workloads that can exploit massive parallelism: 64 cores, 128 threads, 256 MB of L3 cache, and eight-channel memory bandwidth. Its 412% lead in every Cinebench test makes it the dominant processor for rendering farms, server consolidation, and compute-intensive data center tasks. The 71st percentile ranking among all CPUs in the database, alongside rivals like the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U and AMD EPYC 7573X, places it in solidly upper-tier territory.

The Intel Core i3-12100E serves a different purpose entirely. Its 4 cores and 8 threads, higher clock speeds, integrated UHD Graphics 730, and 60 W TDP fit desktop systems where power efficiency and simplicity matter more than raw throughput. The 70th percentile ranking and nearest rivals like the AMD Ryzen 3 7335U and Intel Core i5-1235U show it competes in the mobile and entry desktop space. The additional GeekBench and PassMark scores in the database, covering everything from data compression to floating point math, give it a broader tested profile than the EPYC 7H12.

For a buyer choosing between these two, the decision hinges entirely on the workload. If the task involves hundreds of threads, large shared caches, and ECC memory, the EPYC 7H12 is the only rational option. If the task is a desktop workstation with integrated graphics and modest power draw, the i3-12100E fits that role. The benchmark data does not present a close contest; it presents two processors designed for different arenas, with the EPYC 7H12 winning every test the database ran on both.