AMD EPYC 9254 vs Intel Core i5-11400H Comparison

The AMD EPYC 9254 and Intel Core i5-11400H sit at opposite ends of the computing spectrum, yet their aggregate benchmark averages place them within 0.1% of each other (15,756 vs 15,749). This is a classic case of a server/workstation heavyweight with 24 cores and 48 threads facing a 6-core, 12-thread mobile processor. The data shows a complete rout in raw compute benchmarks, but the story is more nuanced when considering the entire benchmark suite each chip was tested against.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite delivers a decisive, near-uniform victory for the AMD EPYC 9254. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC scores 5,490 against the Intel’s 1,296, a 323.6% advantage. The single-core R15 test tells the same story: 774 for AMD versus 182 for Intel, a 325.3% lead. Moving to Cinebench R20, the EPYC 9254 posts 22,878 multi-core and 3,229 single-core, while the i5-11400H manages 5,400 and 762, respectively. The deltas are 323.7% and 323.8%, favoring AMD in both cases. The pattern holds in Cinebench R23, where the EPYC 9254’s 54,473 multi-core score dwarfs the Intel’s 12,859, and its 7,690 single-core result triples the i5’s 1,815. These are not marginal wins; the EPYC 9254 is consistently over 320% ahead across every Cinebench metric in the head-to-head data.

The most striking aspect is the consistency of the delta. From R15 to R23, the percentage gap barely moves, hovering between 323.6% and 325.3%. This suggests the advantage is structural, rooted in core count and architecture, rather than workload-specific. The EPYC 9254’s 24-core, 48-thread configuration simply overwhelms the i5-11400H’s 6-core, 12-thread design in threaded rendering tests. Even in single-core tests, where the Intel chip has a higher boost clock (4.50 GHz vs 4.15 GHz), the EPYC’s Zen 4 architecture still manages a 323.7% to 325.3% lead. The result is categorical: the AMD part wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, leaving the Intel with zero victories.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data divides cleanly by workload type. The AMD EPYC 9254 wins every single head-to-head test, all of which are Cinebench rendering workloads. This makes it the clear choice for multi-threaded compute, 3D rendering, scientific simulation, and any server-side task that scales with core count. Its 128 MB of shared L3 cache and twelve-channel DDR5 memory bus (460.8 GB/s bandwidth) further reinforce its position as a data-center processor built for throughput.

The Intel Core i5-11400H, despite losing all head-to-head matchups, has its own domain: mobile computing. It is a 35W TDP part with integrated UHD Graphics, designed for laptops. Its benchmark portfolio includes 3DMark tests, Geekbench, and Passmark suites that the EPYC 9254 was not tested on. In those tests, the i5-11400H shows respectable numbers—3DMark single-thread at 884, Geekbench multi-core at 6,396, and Passmark integer math at 53,286. However, without equivalent EPYC 9254 scores for these tests, no direct comparison is possible. The data indicates the Intel chip is a capable mobile processor, but its role is fundamentally different from the EPYC’s server/ workstation segment. The EPYC 9254 has no integrated graphics and a 200W TDP, making it unsuitable for battery-powered devices. The i5-11400H wins on efficiency and portability, though the fact pack provides no benchmark to quantify that advantage.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD EPYC 9254 has an average benchmark score of 15,756, while the Intel Core i5-11400H scores 15,749. The difference is 0.04%, essentially a statistical tie.

Q: How many cores and threads does each CPU have?

A: The AMD EPYC 9254 has 24 cores and 48 threads. The Intel Core i5-11400H has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD EPYC 9254 has a TDP of 200W, while the Intel Core i5-11400H has a TDP of 35W.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 9254 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i5-11400H does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each processor?

A: The AMD EPYC 9254 offers 460.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth via a twelve-channel DDR5 bus. The Intel Core i5-11400H offers 51.2 GB/s via a dual-channel DDR4 bus.

Q: Does the Intel chip have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Intel Core i5-11400H includes UHD Graphics. The AMD EPYC 9254 has no integrated graphics.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every fundamental specification. The AMD EPYC 9254 has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the Intel Core i5-11400H has 6 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 2.90 GHz for the EPYC and 2.20 GHz for the Intel, but the boost clocks reverse the order: 4.15 GHz for AMD and 4.50 GHz for Intel. TDP is a major differentiator—200W for the EPYC versus 35W for the i5. The socket types are incompatible: AMD uses Socket SP5, Intel uses BGA 1787. Memory support diverges completely, with the EPYC using DDR5 over a twelve-channel bus and the Intel using DDR4 over a dual-channel bus. PCIe lanes also differ substantially: the EPYC offers Gen 5 with 128 lanes, while the Intel offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes.

The cache hierarchies are distinct as well. The EPYC 9254 has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 128 MB of shared L3. The Intel i5-11400H has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The EPYC supports ECC memory, the Intel does not. The EPYC has no integrated graphics, while the Intel includes UHD Graphics. The launch MSRP for the EPYC 9254 is $2299; the Intel’s launch MSRP is $250. The EPYC was released on 2022-11-09, the Intel on 2021-05-10.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is generational and philosophical. The AMD EPYC 9254 is built on Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Genoa, using a 5 nm process at TSMC. It packs 26,280 million transistors across a die size of 4x 72 mm². The Intel Core i5-11400H uses Tiger Lake-H architecture, built on Intel’s 10 nm process, with a die size of 190 mm². The EPYC is a server/workstation part from the EPYC 9004 series, designed for socketed platforms with massive scalability. The Intel is a mobile part from the Core 11th Gen series, soldered to the motherboard via BGA 1787.

The EPYC’s Zen 4 architecture brings a 128 MB shared L3 cache, which is ten times larger than the Intel’s 12 MB. The EPYC also leverages a twelve-channel memory controller for DDR5, enabling 460.8 GB/s bandwidth—nine times the Intel’s 51.2 GB/s. The Intel chip compensates with a higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz and a smaller, more power-efficient design. The EPYC’s 200W TDP reflects its server orientation, while the Intel’s 35W TDP is tailored for thin-and-light laptops. The process node difference (5 nm vs 10 nm) and foundry choice (TSMC vs Intel) further underscore the distinct design goals: raw throughput versus power efficiency. Both chips have locked multipliers, but they serve entirely different market segments—the EPYC for data centers and workstations, the Intel for mobile computing.