AMD EPYC 8024P vs Intel Core i7-12700H Comparison

The Intel Core i7-12700H and the AMD EPYC 8024P are aimed at entirely different corners of the hardware world, yet their benchmark scores put them in the same performance conversation. The data shows a mobile processor with a 79th percentile ranking going up against a server chip at the 78th percentile, with average benchmark scores of 26,717 and 26,555 respectively. That 0.6% gap in average scores is negligible, but the way each chip achieves that parity could not be more different. The head-to-head results reveal a 12-to-5 win split in favor of the Intel part, but the AMD wins the more modern Cinebench R23 tests decisively, making the choice entirely dependent on workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic single result in this comparison is in Passmark floating-point math, where the Intel Core i7-12700H scores 65,075 against the EPYC 8024P’s 34,757. That is a 87.2% lead, the largest delta in the entire dataset. The Intel chip also delivers a 45% advantage in Passmark integer math, scoring 90,106 versus 62,128, and a 49.1% lead in Passmark single-thread tests, with 3,535 points to 2,371. These are not marginal differences; the mobile chip is doing substantially more work per clock in these traditional compute tasks.

The Intel part’s wins extend to Cinebench R15 and R20. In R15 multicore, it scores 2,604.6 against 1,761, a 47.9% margin. The R20 multicore result shows a 21.6% lead (8,921 vs 7,338), and the identical 21.6% delta appears in R20 single-core, where Intel scores 1,259 versus 1,035. Passmark data compression also favors Intel heavily, with a 29.4% edge (300,594 vs 232,242), and data encryption shows an 11.2% advantage (17,575 vs 15,809). Even extended instruction workloads go to Intel by 25.5%, with scores of 17,886 and 14,251.

The AMD EPYC 8024P fights back in the newer Cinebench R23 suite. In R23 multicore, the EPYC scores 17,472 against Intel’s 16,307.5, a 6.7% lead. The R23 single-core gap is much larger: the EPYC’s 2,466 score beats Intel’s 1,782 by 27.7%. AMD also wins Passmark physics, 1,905 to 1,512, a 20.6% margin, and Passmark random string sorting by a smaller 3.4% (34,613 vs 33,449). The final AMD win is in Passmark find prime numbers, where it scores 109 versus 94, a 13.8% edge. Passmark multithread goes to Intel, 25,615 vs 20,556, a 24.6% win.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-12700H has an average benchmark score of 26,717, while the AMD EPYC 8024P scores 26,555. That puts Intel ahead by 0.6%, a difference within the noise of most workloads.

Q: Is the AMD EPYC 8024P faster in single-core performance?

A: It depends on the benchmark generation. In the older Cinebench R15 and R20 single-core tests, Intel wins by 3.2% and 21.6% respectively. In the newer Cinebench R23 single-core test, AMD wins by 27.7%, scoring 2,466 against 1,782.

Q: How do the two chips compare in multi-threaded workloads?

A: Intel wins Cinebench R15 multicore by 47.9% and R20 multicore by 21.6%, but AMD wins Cinebench R23 multicore by 6.7%. Passmark multithread favors Intel by 24.6%, with a score of 25,615 vs 20,556.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The biggest delta is in Passmark floating-point math, where the Intel Core i7-12700H leads by 87.2%, scoring 65,075 against the EPYC’s 34,757.

Q: Which chip has better memory bandwidth specifications?

A: The AMD EPYC 8024P supports six-channel DDR5 memory with a rated bandwidth of 230.4 GB/s. The Intel Core i7-12700H uses dual-channel DDR4 or DDR5 memory, with no bandwidth figure listed in the data.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD EPYC 8024P supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i7-12700H does not.

Architecture Differences

The underlying designs are from different eras and philosophies. The Intel Core i7-12700H is built on Intel’s 10 nm process and uses the Alder Lake architecture, specifically the Alder Lake-H codename. It has 14 cores and 20 threads, a combination that implies a hybrid design of performance and efficiency cores, though the core type split is not specified in the data. The die size is 217 mm². The AMD EPYC 8024P, by contrast, uses the Zen 4c architecture with the Siena codename, built on TSMC’s 5 nm process. It packs 8 cores and 16 threads into a much smaller 73 mm² die, with 8,875 million transistors.

Cache layouts differ significantly. Intel allocates 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. AMD gives each core 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2, but the shared L3 pool is larger at 32 MB. The L3 advantage for AMD is 33% more total capacity, which likely contributes to its strong Cinebench R23 results. Process node differences also matter: the 5 nm TSMC process is denser and more power-efficient than Intel’s 10 nm node, although the EPYC’s 90 W TDP is double the mobile chip’s 45 W TDP.

Platform features are polar opposites. The Intel chip uses the Intel BGA 1744 socket and is a mobile part with integrated Iris Xe 96EU graphics. The EPYC 8024P uses the AMD Socket SP6, has no integrated graphics, and is explicitly a server or workstation part. PCIe support also separates them: Intel offers Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes, while AMD offers Gen 5 with 96 CPU lanes. Memory support is another divider, with Intel supporting both DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode, while AMD only supports DDR5 but in a six-channel configuration that reaches 230.4 GB/s of bandwidth.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split: the Intel Core i7-12700H is the better choice for general-purpose compute, legacy benchmark suites, and workloads that favor high clock speeds and broad instruction-level parallelism. It wins 12 of the 17 head-to-head tests, including all Passmark math, compression, encryption, and single-thread tests. If a workload relies on floating-point math, integer math, or data compression, the Intel chip is the pick.

The AMD EPYC 8024P is the better choice for modern multi-threaded rendering and physics simulation. Its Cinebench R23 multicore win and 27.7% single-core advantage in that suite indicate a more efficient architecture for current-generation software. The EPYC also wins in physics and prime number finding, suggesting strengths in scientific and simulation workloads. The six-channel DDR5 memory and ECC support make it the only option for memory-heavy server tasks.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-12700H | AMD EPYC 8024P |

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

| Cores | 14 | 8 |

| Threads | 20 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.30 GHz | 2.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.70 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 90 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1744 | AMD Socket SP6 |

| Architecture | Alder Lake | Zen 4c |

| Codename | Alder Lake-H | Siena |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die Size | 217 mm² | 73 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 24 MB (shared) | 32 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Six-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not specified | 230.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 96 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Iris Xe 96EU | None |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | Not specified | 2023-09-17 |

| Launch MSRP | Not specified | $409 |

| Part Number | SRLD1 | 100-000001136 |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-12700H dominates in legacy and general-purpose compute. Its 87.2% lead in floating-point math and 45% lead in integer math make it the obvious pick for financial modeling, scientific computing that uses older libraries, and any application that runs Cinebench R15 or R20-style instruction mixes. Data compression workloads go to Intel by 29.4%, and encryption by 11.2%, so database compression and VPN or security applications would see a measurable boost. The 49.1% single-thread advantage in Passmark also makes it the better chip for lightly threaded desktop applications and responsive UI work.

The AMD EPYC 8024P wins in the newest rendering and physics tests. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 17,472 is 6.7% higher than Intel’s, and the single-core R23 result is 27.7% higher, indicating that software built for current-generation engines will run faster on the EPYC. Physics simulation shows a 20.6% win, which matters for engineering and game physics. Prime number finding goes to AMD by 13.8%, and random string sorting by 3.4%. Combined with six-channel DDR5 memory bandwidth and ECC support, the EPYC is the better fit for modern server-side rendering, database sorting, and memory-intensive virtualized workloads where data integrity is critical.