AMD EPYC 8024P vs Intel Core i7-1280P Comparison

The AMD EPYC 8024P and Intel Core i7-1280P are an unlikely pairing, one a server processor built for density and the other a mobile chip designed for portability, yet their average benchmark scores place them within 0.3% of each other. The data reveals a fascinating split: the EPYC wins 12 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, while the Core i7 takes 5, but the magnitude of those victories tells a more nuanced story about what each chip is optimized to do.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic separation occurs in the Cinebench R23 tests, where the AMD EPYC 8024P delivers a crushing blow. In the multi-core test, the EPYC scores 17472 against the Intel’s 11666, a staggering 49.8% advantage. The single-core R23 result is equally lopsided, with the EPYC at 2466 versus the Intel’s 1651, a 49.4% gap. This pattern extends to the older Cinebench R20, though with less severity: the EPYC leads by 2.6% in both multi-core (7338 vs 7153) and single-core (1035 vs 1009). Interestingly, the R15 multi-core test flips the script, with the Intel winning 2112 to 1761, a 16.6% margin in its favor, while the EPYC barely edges out a 4.2% win in R15 single-core (248 vs 238).

The Passmark suite reveals a clear division of labor. The EPYC dominates in workloads that stress memory and cryptography: data encryption shows a 20% lead (15809 vs 13179), random string sorting shows a 42.4% advantage (34613 vs 24308), and find prime numbers shows a 26.7% lead (109 vs 86). The EPYC also wins in physics (1905 vs 1411, a 35% margin), extended instructions (14251 vs 12897, a 10.5% lead), and data compression (232242 vs 220621, a 5.3% edge). Its multi-thread score is a narrow 1.9% win (20556 vs 20168).

The Intel Core i7-1280P fights back hardest in math-heavy and single-threaded workloads. Its floating point math score of 51355 crushes the EPYC’s 34757, a 32.3% advantage. Integer math goes to Intel as well, 75485 vs 62128, a 17.7% lead. The single-thread Passmark tests are a decisive Intel victory: 3316 vs 2371, a 28.5% margin in both the `single_thread` and `singlethread` entries. These wins highlight that while the EPYC leads in overall benchmark count, the Intel chip has substantial firepower in raw compute throughput.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental divergence starts at the process node. The EPYC 8024P is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Core i7-1280P uses Intel’s 10 nm node. This difference is reflected in the die size: the EPYC’s die measures a compact 73 mm², whereas the Intel’s is a much larger 217 mm². The EPYC packs 8,875 million transistors into that space, while Intel does not disclose a transistor count in the data.

The core configurations could hardly be more different. The EPYC uses 8 cores and 16 threads based on the Zen 4c architecture, specifically the Siena codename from the EPYC 8004 series. The Intel uses 14 cores and 20 threads on the Alder Lake architecture, with the Alder Lake-P codename. This is a hybrid design, although the data does not specify performance vs efficiency cores. The cache hierarchies also diverge: the EPYC allocates 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, with a 32 MB shared L3. The Intel provides 80 KB of L1 and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, but only 24 MB of shared L3. Despite having fewer total cores, the EPYC’s larger L3 cache suggests a design aimed at keeping more data closer to the cores.

Memory support is a critical server vs mobile distinction. The EPYC supports DDR5 with a six-channel memory bus and a rated bandwidth of 230.4 GB/s, plus ECC memory. The Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5 but uses a dual-channel bus and has no listed bandwidth figure or ECC support. PCIe lanes also differ sharply: the EPYC provides Gen 5 with 96 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The Intel integrates Iris Xe 96EU graphics; the EPYC has no integrated graphics. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP6, while the Intel uses Intel BGA 1744, and the TDP ratings are 90 W for the EPYC versus 28 W for the Intel.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 8024P is the clear winner for server-oriented, multi-threaded, and memory-sensitive workloads. Its 49.8% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core suggests exceptional sustained performance for rendering or heavy parallel computation. The 20% edge in data encryption and the 42.4% lead in random string sorting point to strengths in database operations, data compression, and cryptography—tasks that benefit from high memory bandwidth and the six-channel bus. The 35% win in physics and the 26.7% lead in prime number finding further cement its position for scientific and simulation workloads. The 5.3% data compression win and 10.5% extended instructions lead round out a profile that favors enterprise applications.

The Intel Core i7-1280P wins where raw single-thread speed and math throughput matter most. The 28.5% lead in Passmark single-thread tests is a massive advantage for everyday responsiveness and lightly-threaded applications. The 32.3% floating point math win and 17.7% integer math win are significant for financial modeling, scientific computing that uses FPU-heavy code, or any workload that doesn’t scale perfectly across cores. The 16.6% win in Cinebench R15 multi-core is an outlier that may reflect the Intel’s higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz versus the EPYC’s 3.00 GHz, suggesting that shorter multi-threaded bursts favor the Intel.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every key specification. The EPYC has 8 cores and 16 threads; the Intel has 14 cores and 20 threads. Base clocks are listed as 2.40 GHz for the EPYC and 1800.00 MHz for the Intel, though the Intel’s boost clock of 4.80 GHz far exceeds the EPYC’s 3.00 GHz. TDP is 90 W for the EPYC versus 28 W for the Intel. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP6, while the Intel uses Intel BGA 1744. Process nodes are 5 nm (TSMC) for AMD and 10 nm (Intel) for Intel. The EPYC has 8,875 million transistors on a 73 mm² die; the Intel has no listed transistor count on a 217 mm² die. Cache per core is 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 for the EPYC, versus 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 for the Intel; shared L3 is 32 MB for the EPYC and 24 MB for the Intel. Memory support is DDR5 only with six channels for the EPYC, versus DDR4 and DDR5 with dual channels for the Intel. The EPYC has ECC memory, the Intel does not. PCIe is Gen 5 with 96 lanes for the EPYC, Gen 4 with 20 lanes for the Intel. The Intel has integrated Iris Xe 96EU graphics; the EPYC has none. Release dates are September 2023 for the EPYC and February 2022 for the Intel.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD EPYC 8024P has an average benchmark score of 26555, while the Intel Core i7-1280P scores 26469. The delta is 0.3% in favor of the EPYC.

Q: How do they compare in single-threaded performance?

A: The Intel wins Passmark single-thread tests decisively, scoring 3316 versus the EPYC’s 2371, a 28.5% lead. However, the EPYC wins Cinebench R23 single-core with 2466 versus 1651, a 49.4% margin, and also wins R20 single-core (1035 vs 1009) and R15 single-core (248 vs 238).

Q: What is the biggest multi-core performance difference?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 17472 versus the Intel’s 11666, a 49.8% advantage. In R20 multi-core, the EPYC leads by a smaller 2.6% (7338 vs 7153), and in R15 multi-core, the Intel wins by 16.6% (2112 vs 1761).

Q: Does the Intel Core i7-1280P win any math benchmarks?

A: Yes, the Intel wins floating point math with 51355 versus 34757, a 32.3% lead, and integer math with 75485 versus 62128, a 17.7% lead.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 8024P supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i7-1280P does not have ECC support listed.

Q: What are the memory channel configurations?

A: The EPYC uses a six-channel memory bus, while the Intel uses a dual-channel bus. The EPYC also lists a memory bandwidth of 230.4 GB/s, while the Intel has no bandwidth figure provided.

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct profiles. The AMD EPYC 8024P is the choice for server and workstation deployments where multi-threaded throughput, memory bandwidth, and ECC reliability are paramount. Its 49.8% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 20% encryption advantage make it a strong candidate for virtualization, database serving, and content rendering. The 96 PCIe Gen 5 lanes and six-channel DDR5 support reinforce its server credentials.

The Intel Core i7-1280P is better suited for mobile workstations or high-end laptops where single-thread responsiveness and math performance take priority. Its 28.5% single-thread Passmark lead and 32.3% floating point advantage make it ideal for interactive applications, financial analysis, and engineering software that relies on high clock speeds. The integrated Iris Xe 96EU graphics and lower 28 W TDP also make it a more practical choice for portable systems.

There is no universal winner. The EPYC wins more benchmarks overall, but the Intel wins the workloads that feel fastest in everyday use. Buyers should decide based on whether their primary workloads resemble the EPYC’s strengths—crypto, sorting, multi-core rendering—or the Intel’s strengths—single-thread math and floating point. The 0.3% average score difference is negligible; the workload-specific deltas of 20-50% are what genuinely matter.