AMD EPYC 9224 vs Intel Core i5-1145G7 Comparison

This comparison pairs an end-of-life mobile processor from Intel with a 24-core server behemoth from AMD. The data shows a complete mismatch in workload targets, with the EPYC 9224 winning every single benchmark in the head-to-head set. However, the Intel Core i5-1145G7 holds its own in its own niche, as its average benchmark score and percentile ranking suggest it is a competent chip for its intended use. The analysis below breaks down where each processor wins based strictly on the provided benchmark results and specifications.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 9224 wins everywhere that matters for raw compute throughput. In the head-to-head benchmarks, it takes all six tests, with every result showing a deltaPct of -79.8% relative to the Intel chip. This means the EPYC 9224 scores roughly 395% higher than the Core i5-1145G7 in each of those tests. Its wins span both multi-core and single-core Cinebench workloads, indicating a decisive advantage in both parallel and lightly-threaded tasks.

The Intel Core i5-1145G7 does not win any head-to-head benchmark. Its only advantages are contextual, not performance-based. Its launch MSRP is $309, compared to $1825 for the EPYC 9224, and it draws 28W of power versus 200W. The i5 is designed for mobile systems with its Intel BGA 1449 socket and integrated Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU, making it the only option here for a compact, low-power laptop or ultrabook. It also supports DDR4 and LPDDR4X memory, while the EPYC requires DDR5.

The EPYC 9224 is the clear winner for server workloads, multi-threaded rendering, and any task that can use its 24 cores and 48 threads. The data shows its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 38439 is over 4.9 times higher than the i5's 7777. For professional environments running virtual machines, database workloads, or heavy compilation, the EPYC is the only viable choice. The i5's wins are purely in portability and power efficiency, making it the pick for a thin-and-light laptop where battery life matters more than compute density.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better multi-core performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 9224 wins decisively. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 38439 versus the Intel Core i5-1145G7's 7777, a deltaPct of -79.8% for the i5. The same pattern holds in R20 (16144 vs 3266) and R15 (3874 vs 783).

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-1145G7 better for single-threaded tasks?

A: No. The EPYC 9224 also wins every single-core benchmark. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score is 5426 against the i5's 1098, and R20 shows 2278 versus 461. The EPYC's advantage persists across all six head-to-head tests.

Q: Can the Intel chip be used in a server motherboard?

A: No. The Intel Core i5-1145G7 uses the Intel BGA 1449 socket, which is a mobile socket. The AMD EPYC 9224 uses the AMD Socket SP5, a server platform. They are not interchangeable.

Q: What are the memory support differences?

A: The Intel chip supports DDR4 and LPDDR4X in a dual-channel configuration, with no ECC support. The AMD EPYC 9224 supports DDR5 in a twelve-channel configuration with ECC memory enabled, offering a memory bandwidth of 460.8 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i5-1145G7 includes integrated graphics, specifically the Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU. The AMD EPYC 9224 has no integrated graphics, which is typical for server processors that rely on discrete GPUs.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core i5-1145G7 has an average benchmark score of 11279, while the AMD EPYC 9224 has an average of 11118. Despite the EPYC's dominance in Cinebench, the i5's higher average comes from its strong PassMark results, including a data compression score of 103172 and integer math score of 32087.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous. The AMD EPYC 9224 wins all six head-to-head tests, with every deltaPct reading -79.8% relative to the Intel Core i5-1145G7. This consistent margin across different Cinebench versions indicates a proportional performance gap that scales with the test's demands.

The largest absolute difference appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The EPYC scores 38439, while the i5 manages 7777. That is a difference of 30662 points, which translates to the EPYC delivering roughly 4.9 times the multi-threaded throughput. In R20 multi-core, the gap is 12878 points (16144 vs 3266), and in R15 multi-core, it is 3091 points (3874 vs 783).

Single-core results show a similar pattern, though with smaller absolute numbers. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC scores 5426 against the i5's 1098, a gap of 4328 points. R20 single-core shows 2278 versus 461, and R15 single-core shows 546 versus 110. The EPYC's single-core advantage is proportionally identical to its multi-core win, suggesting the Zen 4 architecture's per-core efficiency is far superior to Tiger Lake's in these tests.

It is importantly the Intel chip does have its own benchmark strengths outside the head-to-head set. Its PassMark data compression score of 103172 and floating point math score of 19233 are respectable for a mobile chip. However, when directly compared to the EPYC in Cinebench, the Intel processor loses every contest by the same relative margin, indicating a fundamental performance ceiling that the EPYC simply does not hit.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification category. The Intel Core i5-1145G7 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD EPYC 9224 has 24 cores and 48 threads. Clock speeds favor the Intel chip: its base clock is 2.60 GHz and boost clock is 4.40 GHz, compared to the EPYC's 2.50 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost. Power draw is dramatically different, with the i5 rated at 28W TDP and the EPYC at 200W TDP.

Memory support diverges sharply. The i5 uses DDR4 or LPDDR4X in a dual-channel layout with no ECC. The EPYC uses DDR5 in a twelve-channel configuration with ECC, and its memory bandwidth is listed at 460.8 GB/s. The PCIe interfaces also differ: the i5 has Gen 4 with 4 lanes, while the EPYC provides Gen 5 with 128 lanes.

Cache configurations are distinct. The i5 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The EPYC has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a much larger 64 MB of shared L3. The Intel chip includes integrated Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EU, while the EPYC has none. The EPYC is an active production part, while the i5 is end-of-life.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is generational and fundamental. The Intel Core i5-1145G7 is built on Intel's 10 nm process node using the Tiger Lake architecture with Willow Cove cores. It has a die size of 144 mm². The AMD EPYC 9224 uses TSMC's 5 nm process node with the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Genoa. It has 26,280 million transistors across a die size of 4x 72 mm².

The EPYC's 5 nm process allows for significantly higher transistor density compared to Intel's 10 nm node. This explains how AMD fits 24 cores into a package while maintaining a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. The i5's smaller core count and higher boost clock of 4.40 GHz reflects its mobile focus, where thermal limits are tighter.

Cache architecture also reflects different design philosophies. The i5's L1 cache is 80 KB per core, larger than the EPYC's 64 KB per core. However, the EPYC's 64 MB shared L3 is eight times larger than the i5's 8 MB shared L3. This larger cache is critical for server workloads with large working sets. The EPYC also supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the i5, which is essential for data integrity in enterprise environments.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion: the AMD EPYC 9224 is the superior processor for any compute-intensive workload, while the Intel Core i5-1145G7 serves a completely different purpose. If you are building a server or workstation that will run multi-threaded applications, the EPYC's 24 cores and 48 threads deliver roughly 4.9 times the multi-core performance of the i5 in Cinebench R23. Its 460.8 GB/s memory bandwidth and 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes make it suitable for high-end storage and networking tasks.

However, the Intel chip is not a failure. Its average benchmark score of 11279 is slightly higher than the EPYC's 11118, driven by strong PassMark results in data compression and integer math. Its 28W TDP and integrated graphics make it the only option here for a mobile device. The i5's launch MSRP of $309 is significantly lower than the EPYC's $1825, and its end-of-life status means it may be available at reduced prices in existing laptops.

Who should pick which? Buyers needing a laptop with decent single-thread performance and low power draw should choose the i5-1145G7. It is a capable mobile chip that can handle everyday tasks and light productivity. Buyers needing a server CPU for heavy parallel workloads, virtualization, or memory-intensive applications should choose the EPYC 9224. The benchmark results are clear: the EPYC wins every head-to-head test, and its architecture is designed for exactly the kind of sustained, multi-threaded load that would overwhelm the i5's four cores.