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

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF and AMD EPYC 8124P occupy different corners of the processor market, yet both land at the 91st percentile among all CPUs in the database. The Intel part, a desktop Arrow Lake chip, posts an average benchmark score of 55,093, while the AMD server/workstation Siena chip averages 52,121. Their nearest rivals show how tightly grouped they are: the Intel sits 0.6% above the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D, and the AMD sits 0.1% above the Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX. Across 17 head-to-head tests, the Intel wins 13 and the AMD wins 4.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is single-thread performance. In Passmark single-thread, the Intel scores 4,715 against the AMD's 2,271, a delta of 107.6%. That is more than double the throughput, and it reflects the Intel's 5.20 GHz boost clock versus the AMD's 3.00 GHz. The Cinebench single-core tests tell a similar story: R15 gives 521 vs 435 (19.8% lead), R20 gives 2,172 vs 1,814 (19.7%), and R23 gives 5,173 vs 4,321 (19.7%). The consistency of that 19.7% delta across all three Cinebench versions indicates a stable architectural advantage in lightly threaded workloads.

Multi-threaded Cinebench results follow the same pattern. The Intel leads by 19.7% in R15 (3,693 vs 3,085), R20 (15,391 vs 12,856), and R23 (36,647 vs 30,611). Passmark multithread also shows a 19.7% gap (43,110 vs 36,014). This is notable because the AMD has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel has 14 cores and 14 threads. The Intel's higher clock speed and per-core efficiency overcome the AMD's extra threads in these rendering workloads.

The Intel also dominates in floating-point math, scoring 131,546 against the AMD's 72,395, a delta of 81.7%. Prime number finding is even more lopsided: 416 vs 222, a delta of 87.4%. Extended instruction throughput favors the Intel by 27.8% (37,912 vs 29,666). Data encryption is a narrower win for the Intel at 8.6% (33,381 vs 30,743).

The AMD's four wins are concentrated in integer and memory-sensitive tasks. Integer math goes to the AMD by 20% (123,513 vs 98,854). Random string sorting favors the AMD by 13.8% (64,067 vs 55,206). Physics simulation shows a 10.7% AMD lead (3,356 vs 2,998). Data compression is a slim 1.8% win for the AMD (468,411 vs 460,123). These results suggest the AMD's larger L3 cache (64 MB vs 24 MB) and six-channel memory controller help in workloads that are not purely compute-bound.

The average benchmark scores place the Intel 5.7% higher overall (55,093 vs 52,121), but both chips sit at the same 91st percentile. The Intel's nearest rival, the Ryzen 9 9900X3D, is only 0.6% behind, while the AMD's nearest rival, the Core Ultra 5 235HX, is 0.1% behind. This indicates that both processors are competitive within their respective market segments, but the Intel has a broader performance lead in the measured tests.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF leads by 107.6% in Passmark single-thread (4,715 vs 2,271) and by 19.7% in Cinebench R23 single-core (5,173 vs 4,321).

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The AMD EPYC 8124P has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF has 14 cores and 14 threads. The AMD offers simultaneous multithreading, the Intel does not.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 8124P supports ECC memory; the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF does not.

Q: Which has more PCIe lanes?

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

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD EPYC 8124P has six-channel DDR5 with 230.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel has dual-channel DDR5 with 102.4 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF averages 55,093, compared to the AMD's 52,121. Both sit at the 91st percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two chips are built on different process nodes and microarchitectures. The Intel uses a 3 nm process from TSMC, while the AMD uses a 5 nm process, also from TSMC. Transistor counts are nearly identical: 17,800 million for the Intel and 17,750 million for the AMD. The Intel die is a single 243 mm² piece, whereas the AMD uses two 73 mm² dies.

Cache hierarchies diverge significantly. The Intel allocates 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The AMD provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3. The AMD's larger L3 and smaller per-core L1/L2 reflect a design aimed at server workloads with high memory-level parallelism.

Memory support differs in channel count and bandwidth. The Intel uses a dual-channel DDR5 controller with 102.4 GB/s, while the AMD uses a six-channel controller with 230.4 GB/s. The AMD also supports ECC memory, which the Intel does not. PCIe connectivity is another major split: the Intel offers 20 Gen 5 lanes, the AMD offers 96.

The sockets are incompatible: Intel Socket 1851 for the Intel, AMD Socket SP6 for the AMD. The Intel is a desktop part with an unlocked multiplier, while the AMD is a server/workstation part with a locked multiplier. The Intel's architecture is Arrow Lake (Arrow Lake-S), and the AMD's is Zen 4c (Siena). The Intel was released on 2024-10-23, the AMD on 2023-09-17.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF | 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 |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1851 | AMD Socket SP6 |

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

| Process node | 3 nm | 5 nm |

| Die size | 243 mm² | 2x 73 mm² |

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

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

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

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Six-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 230.4 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe lanes | 20 (Gen 5) | 96 (Gen 5) |

| Market segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

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

| Launch MSRP | $294 | $639 |

| Multiplier unlocked | Yes | No |

| Part number | SRQCY | 100-000001135 |

Both processors have a TDP of 125 W, support DDR5, are manufactured by TSMC, are active in production, and hold the 91st percentile ranking.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split in intended use. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF is the stronger choice for single-threaded and floating-point-heavy workloads. Its 107.6% lead in Passmark single-thread and 81.7% lead in floating-point math make it ideal for desktop applications, gaming, and general productivity where per-core speed matters. The consistent 19.7% advantage across all Cinebench versions, both single and multi-core, reinforces this.

The AMD EPYC 8124P, on the other hand, wins in integer math, data compression, physics simulation, and random string sorting. Its 20% lead in integer math and 13.8% lead in random string sorting suggest strengths in database, encryption, and server-side processing. The AMD also offers ECC memory, 96 PCIe lanes, and 230.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth, which are essential for server and workstation environments that require reliability and high I/O throughput.

The Intel has a higher average benchmark score (55,093 vs 52,121) and wins 13 of 17 head-to-head tests. However, the AMD's four wins are in specific, memory-latency-sensitive areas where its larger L3 cache and six-channel memory controller provide a tangible benefit. The AMD also has double the threads (32 vs 14), which could be advantageous in heavily parallel server workloads that are not captured by the tested benchmarks.

For a desktop user seeking maximum single-thread performance and strong multi-thread rendering, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF is the data-backed pick. For a server or workstation deployment that demands ECC, high memory bandwidth, and extensive PCIe connectivity, the AMD EPYC 8124P is the appropriate choice. Both processors sit at the same 91st percentile, so the decision rests on workload priorities rather than overall standing.