AMD EPYC 8124P vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K and the AMD EPYC 8124P represent two fundamentally different interpretations of the x86 processor, despite sharing a 125 TDP rating and a 91st percentile ranking among all CPUs. The data shows a near-even split in benchmark victories, with the Intel part taking 10 wins against 7 for the AMD part. This is not a story of a single dominant force, but rather a clear divergence in workload suitability, driven by architectural priorities that could not be more distinct.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K is the clear choice for latency-sensitive and lightly threaded tasks. Its wins are concentrated in single-core and instruction-heavy workloads, where its high boost clock and newer core design provide a decisive edge. The benchmark results indicate a commanding lead in PassMark single-thread performance, floating-point math, and prime number finding, making it the stronger candidate for interactive desktop use, general application responsiveness, and scientific or engineering calculations that rely on high per-core throughput.

The AMD EPYC 8124P, in contrast, is a server part designed for throughput and parallelism. Its wins come in areas that benefit from more physical cores and simultaneous multithreading. The data shows it taking the lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core, integer math, data compression, random string sorting, and physics calculations. These are the workloads that scale with core count and memory bandwidth, such as database operations, virtualization, and batch processing. The EPYC also wins the single-core Cinebench R15 test, a notable outlier that highlights the complexity of comparing these two architectures.

The split is clean: Intel wins on responsiveness and floating-point, AMD wins on parallel integer-heavy throughput and cache-sensitive operations. Neither part is a general-purpose replacement for the other.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on opposite design philosophies. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K is a 14-core, 14-thread desktop part built on Arrow Lake, a 3 nm process from TSMC. It has no hyperthreading, which is a deliberate choice to favor raw core performance and power efficiency over thread density. The AMD EPYC 8124P is a 16-core, 32-thread server processor using Zen 4c architecture on a 5 nm process, also from TSMC. It doubles the thread count through simultaneous multithreading, allowing it to process more concurrent work.

Cache layouts are a major differentiator. The Intel part has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The AMD part has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a much larger 64 MB of shared L3. The EPYC's larger L3 cache is critical for its wins in data compression and random string sorting, where large working sets can fit on-die. The Intel part's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches help with latency-sensitive single-threaded work.

Memory and I/O are where the server nature of the EPYC becomes obvious. The Intel part uses dual-channel DDR5 with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth and 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. The AMD part uses six-channel DDR5 with 230.4 GB/s of bandwidth and 96 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. This massive difference in memory bandwidth and lane count makes the EPYC far more suitable for memory-bound server workloads and high-density storage or networking configurations. The Intel part has integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, while the EPYC has no integrated graphics at all. The EPYC also has a locked multiplier, whereas the Intel part is unlocked for overclocking.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic Intel win is in PassMark single-thread performance, where it scores 4714 against the EPYC's 2271, a 107.6% advantage. This is a doubling of performance, and it explains why the Intel part feels vastly snappier in everyday use. The same pattern appears in PassMark floating-point math, where Intel scores 130678 against 72395, an 80.5% lead, and in prime number finding, where Intel scores 414 against 222, an 86.5% lead. These are massive gaps that cannot be overcome by any amount of core count scaling.

The Intel part also wins Cinebench R20 multi-core by 19.5% (15368 vs 12856) and R20 single-core by 19.6% (2169 vs 1814). It wins PassMark extended instructions by 26.8% (37617 vs 29666) and multithread by 19.5% (43047 vs 36014). The data shows a consistent pattern: Intel wins on math, encryption (8.3% lead, 33286 vs 30743), and instruction-heavy workloads.

The AMD EPYC takes its largest win in Cinebench R23 single-core, scoring 4321 against Intel's 2132, a 50.7% lead. This is a striking result given Intel's dominance in other single-thread tests, and it suggests workload-specific differences in how the two architectures handle the Cinebench rendering engine. The EPYC also wins Cinebench R23 multi-core by 18.1% (30611 vs 25066), a reversal of the R20 multi-core result that shows how benchmark versions can shift the balance. In PassMark integer math, AMD takes a 20.2% lead (123513 vs 98524), and in random string sorting it wins by 14% (64067 vs 55098). Data compression is close, with AMD ahead by just 2% (468411 vs 458817). Physics shows an 8.2% win for AMD (3356 vs 3081).

The overall average benchmark scores are close: Intel at 54053 and AMD at 52121. The nearest rivals for the Intel part include the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D, which is 1.3% ahead, and the Intel Core i7-14700F, which is 0.8% behind. For the AMD part, the nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X at 0.3% ahead and the Intel Core i7-14700 at 0.3% behind. These figures place both processors in a tight performance band despite their architectural differences.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion: choose the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K for desktop responsiveness, floating-point math, and single-threaded application performance. It is the stronger part for interactive workloads, and its 107.6% lead in single-thread performance is the defining metric of this comparison. The unlocked multiplier and integrated graphics also make it a more flexible desktop platform.

Choose the AMD EPYC 8124P for server and workstation workloads that scale with thread count, large caches, and memory bandwidth. Its 16 cores and 32 threads, combined with 64 MB of L3 cache and six-channel DDR5, make it the right choice for virtualization, database work, and data compression. The 230.4 GB/s memory bandwidth is more than double the Intel part's 102.4 GB/s, and the 96 PCIe Gen 5 lanes provide far greater I/O expansion capability. The Cinebench R23 results, where AMD wins both single-core and multi-core, further support its suitability for rendering and content creation server workloads.

The EPYC's launch MSRP is $639, and the Intel part's launch MSRP is $319, but the comparison is not about cost; it is about matching the silicon to the task. The Intel part is a performance-per-core champion, and the AMD part is a throughput-per-socket champion.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-threaded tasks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K wins PassMark single-thread by 107.6% (4714 vs 2271), but the AMD EPYC 8124P wins Cinebench R23 single-core by 50.7% (4321 vs 2132) and Cinebench R15 single-core by 26% (435 vs 322). The winner depends on the specific benchmark.

Q: Which processor has better memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD EPYC 8124P has a six-channel DDR5 memory bus with 230.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K has a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K has 14 cores and 14 threads, while the AMD EPYC 8124P has 16 cores and 32 threads. The EPYC uses simultaneous multithreading to double its thread count.

Q: Which processor is better for data compression?

A: The AMD EPYC 8124P wins PassMark data compression by 2% (468411 vs 458817), a narrow margin that reflects the benefit of its 64 MB shared L3 cache.

Q: Does the Intel processor have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K has Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The AMD EPYC 8124P has no integrated graphics.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes?

A: The AMD EPYC 8124P has 96 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K has 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 5 245K | AMD EPYC 8124P |

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

| Cores | 14 | 16 |

| Threads | 14 | 32 |

| Base Clock | 4.20 GHz | 2.45 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.20 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 17,800 million | 17,750 million |

| Die Size | 243 mm² | 2x 73 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 192 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 3 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 24 MB (shared) | 64 MB (shared) |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 230.4 GB/s |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU | None |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1851 | AMD Socket SP6 |

| Architecture | Arrow Lake | Zen 4c (Siena) |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Release Date | 2024-10-23 | 2023-09-17 |