AMD EPYC 7H12 vs Intel Core i5-1235U Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD EPYC 7H12 dominates every recorded head-to-head benchmark against the Intel Core i5-1235U. The margin is not close in any test, and the pattern is consistent across all Cinebench versions and both single-core and multi-core workloads.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7H12 scores 5965 against the i5-1235U's 985, a 505.6% advantage. The single-core result is similar in relative terms: 842 versus 138, a 510.1% lead for the AMD part. This is notable because single-core performance is typically where a higher-clocked mobile chip like the i5-1235U, with its 4.40 GHz boost clock, would normally close the gap. The data shows it does not.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the EPYC 7H12 posts 24858 in multi-core versus 4105 for the Intel chip, again a 505.6% delta. The single-core test shows 3509 against 579, a 506% lead. The consistency of these percentages, all hovering near 505-506%, suggests the performance ratio is driven by the fundamental architectural difference in core count and thread count rather than any workload-specific quirk.

Cinebench R23 tells the same story. The EPYC 7H12 scores 59188 in multi-core, while the i5-1235U manages 9774, a 505.6% gap. In single-core, the AMD chip scores 8355 versus 1379, a 505.9% lead. Across all six head-to-head tests, the AMD EPYC 7H12 wins every single one, with no recorded wins for the Intel part.

The broader benchmark averages confirm this hierarchy. The EPYC 7H12 holds an average benchmark score of 17120 across its recorded tests, placing it in the 71st percentile of all CPUs in the database. The i5-1235U averages 16770, sitting at the 70th percentile. While the percentile ranks are close, the average scores differ by 350 points, and the head-to-head deltas are enormous because the two chips are optimized for completely different workloads.

It is importantly the i5-1235U has additional benchmark data beyond Cinebench, including Geekbench and Passmark tests. In Geekbench multi-core it scores 5308, and in single-core 1609. Passmark results show 12923 in multithread, 3151 in single-thread, and strong numbers in integer math (48553) and floating-point math (43303). However, none of these additional tests appear in the head-to-head comparison, and the recorded Cinebench results all favor the EPYC 7H12 by a factor of roughly six.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 7H12 is the superior processor in every measured benchmark. It wins all six head-to-head tests with deltas exceeding 500%. For workloads that can utilize its 64 cores and 128 threads, the EPYC 7H12 delivers approximately six times the multi-core performance of the i5-1235U. Even in single-core tests, where the Intel chip's 4.40 GHz boost clock might be expected to help, the EPYC 7H12 still leads by over 500%.

Who should pick which? The recorded data points to a clear split. The EPYC 7H12 is a server and workstation processor with a 280 W TDP, designed for sustained heavy compute. The i5-1235U is a mobile processor with a 15 W TDP, intended for laptops and power-constrained devices. If the workload involves rendering, simulation, data processing, or any multi-threaded server task, the EPYC 7H12 is the only choice based on these numbers. The i5-1235U, despite its lower raw scores, offers integrated Iris Xe graphics and a much lower power envelope, which matters for portable systems.

The percentile rankings are close, but that reflects the average of all tests in the database, not the head-to-head comparison. In direct competition, the EPYC 7H12 is not merely better; it is in a different performance class.

Architecture Differences

The core architectural split between these two processors is stark. The AMD EPYC 7H12 uses the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Rome, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 64 cores and 128 threads, with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 3.30 GHz. The chip contains 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. Cache is generous: 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 256 MB L3 cache.

The Intel Core i5-1235U uses the Alder Lake architecture, specifically Alder Lake-U, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. It has 10 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 1300 MHz (1.30 GHz) and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The cache configuration is smaller: 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

The socket and platform differ entirely. The EPYC 7H12 uses AMD Socket SP3, a server platform, while the i5-1235U uses Intel BGA 1744, a soldered mobile package. Memory support diverges as well: the EPYC 7H12 supports DDR4 with an eight-channel memory bus and a recorded bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, plus ECC memory support. The i5-1235U supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus, but no ECC support. PCIe generation is Gen 4 on both, though the Intel chip specifies 20 lanes on the CPU only.

The process node difference is significant: 7 nm for AMD versus 10 nm for Intel. The EPYC 7H12 also has a much larger transistor count, 3,800 million versus no recorded figure for the Intel chip. The die size is recorded only for the AMD part at 74 mm².

The i5-1235U includes integrated Iris Xe graphics with 80 execution units, while the EPYC 7H12 has no integrated graphics listed. This is a key feature difference for mobile use, as the i5-1235U can drive a display without a discrete GPU.

Release dates also differ: the EPYC 7H12 launched on September 17, 2019, while the i5-1235U arrived on February 22, 2022. Both are currently listed as active production parts. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD EPYC 7H12 is dramatically faster. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 59188 versus 9774 for the i5-1235U, a 505.6% advantage. The same pattern appears in Cinebench R15 (5965 vs 985) and R20 (24858 vs 4105).

Q: Does the Intel chip win in single-core performance?

A: No. Despite the i5-1235U's higher boost clock of 4.40 GHz versus 3.30 GHz, the EPYC 7H12 wins all single-core tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD chip scores 8355 versus 1379, a 505.9% lead.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The AMD EPYC 7H12 has 64 cores and 128 threads. The Intel Core i5-1235U has 10 cores and 12 threads. This core count difference is the primary driver of the multi-core benchmark gaps.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 7H12 supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i5-1235U does not. The EPYC 7H12 also uses an eight-channel memory bus with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, versus dual-channel for the Intel chip.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: No. The Intel Core i5-1235U includes Iris Xe graphics with 80 execution units. The AMD EPYC 7H12 has no integrated graphics listed in the database.

Q: What are the TDP values?

A: The AMD EPYC 7H12 has a TDP of 280 W. The Intel Core i5-1235U has a TDP of 15 W. This reflects their different market segments: server/workstation versus mobile.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7H12 wins in every recorded head-to-head benchmark. The data shows six wins for the AMD part and zero for the Intel part. This is not a nuanced split; the EPYC 7H12 is categorically faster in all Cinebench tests, both single-core and multi-core.

For use cases, the EPYC 7H12 is suited for server and workstation environments where its 64 cores, 128 threads, 256 MB L3 cache, and eight-channel DDR4 memory with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth can be fully utilized. Its 280 W TDP indicates a system designed for sustained heavy compute, likely in rack-mounted servers or high-end workstations. The ECC memory support and AMD Socket SP3 platform reinforce this enterprise positioning.

The Intel Core i5-1235U, despite losing all head-to-head benchmarks, has clear advantages in other dimensions. Its 15 W TDP makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops. The integrated Iris Xe graphics with 80 execution units means no discrete GPU is required for basic display output or light graphics work. The dual-channel memory support for DDR4 and DDR5 offers flexibility in system design. The BGA 1744 socket indicates a soldered, non-upgradeable mobile part, which is standard for ultraportables.

The additional Passmark benchmarks for the i5-1235U, while not part of the head-to-head set, show it is competent in specific tasks: 147450 in data compression, 9347 in data encryption, 48553 in integer math, and 43303 in floating-point math. These are not compared directly to the EPYC 7H12, but they indicate the Intel chip is not without capability in certain workloads.

The practical split is simple: choose the EPYC 7H12 for compute-dense server workloads, choose the i5-1235U for battery-powered mobile systems where power efficiency and integrated graphics matter more than raw throughput.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every recorded specification field.

• Cores: AMD EPYC 7H12 has 64, Intel Core i5-1235U has 10.
• Threads: AMD EPYC 7H12 has 128, Intel Core i5-1235U has 12.
• Base clock: 2.60 GHz for AMD, 1300 MHz (1.30 GHz) for Intel.
• Boost clock: 3.30 GHz for AMD, 4.40 GHz for Intel.
• TDP: 280 W for AMD, 15 W for Intel.
• Socket: AMD Socket SP3 for the EPYC 7H12, Intel BGA 1744 for the i5-1235U.
• Architecture: Zen 2 for AMD, Alder Lake for Intel.
• Codename: Rome for AMD, Alder Lake-U for Intel.
• Process node: 7 nm for AMD, 10 nm for Intel.
• Foundry: TSMC for AMD, Intel for the i5-1235U.
• Transistors: 3,800 million for AMD, no recorded value for Intel.
• Die size: 74 mm² for AMD, no recorded value for Intel.
• L1 cache: 96 KB per core for AMD, 80 KB per core for Intel.
• L2 cache: 512 KB per core for AMD, 1.25 MB per core for Intel.
• L3 cache: 256 MB shared for AMD, 12 MB shared for Intel.
• Memory support: DDR4 for AMD, DDR4 and DDR5 for Intel.
• Memory bus: Eight-channel for AMD, dual-channel for Intel.
• Memory bandwidth: 204.8 GB/s for AMD, no recorded value for Intel.
• ECC memory: Supported for AMD, not supported for Intel.
• PCIe: Gen 4 for both, with Intel specifying 20 lanes on CPU only.
• Integrated graphics: None for AMD, Iris Xe 80EU for Intel.
• Market segment: Server/Workstation for AMD, Mobile for Intel.
• Release date: 2019-09-17 for AMD, 2022-02-22 for Intel.
• Part number: 100-000000055 for AMD, SRLFR for Intel.

Both processors are listed as active in production, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The launch MSRP is not recorded for either part.