AMD EPYC 9274F vs Intel Core 5 120U Comparison

The AMD EPYC 9274F and Intel Core 5 120U are not natural rivals. One is a 24-core server processor from the EPYC 9004 series, built on Zen 4 (Genoa) at 5 nm, while the other is a 10-core mobile chip from Raptor Lake-U, built on Intel's 10 nm process. The database places both at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs, with average benchmark scores of 18189 and 17898 respectively. Yet the head-to-head Cinebench results reveal a chasm: the EPYC wins all six recorded tests, with margins ranging from 264.9% to 844.3%. This analysis examines what those numbers mean for each processor's intended role.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The EPYC 9274F dominates every recorded head-to-head benchmark. The largest margin appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 62884 against 6659, a 844.3% advantage. The smallest margin is in Cinebench R15 single-core, still a 264.9% lead (894 vs 245). In Cinebench R20, both multi-core and single-core tests show the same 393.8% advantage, with scores of 26411 vs 5349 and 3728 vs 755 respectively. The R15 multi-core test shows a 450.9% gap (6338 vs 1150.5), and R23 single-core shows a 405.4% lead (8877 vs 1756.5).

The EPYC's lead grows with thread count and workload complexity. In R23 multi-core, the gap is over eight times the Intel's score. Even in single-core, where the Intel's boost clock reaches 5.00 GHz against the EPYC's 4.30 GHz, the EPYC still leads by 405.4% in R23 single-core. This suggests that raw clock speed is not the deciding factor; the EPYC's architecture and cache hierarchy likely play a larger role. The data shows that the EPYC's advantage is not solely dependent on core count, as even single-core tests show a large lead.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data shows no benchmark where the Intel Core 5 120U outperforms the AMD EPYC 9274F. All six Cinebench tests, covering both multi-core and single-core workloads, are won by the EPYC. This means that for any rendering or compute task measured by Cinebench, the EPYC is the superior choice. The Intel's only potential advantages lie outside these benchmarks: it includes integrated Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, which the EPYC lacks, and its TDP is 15W versus 320W. However, the database does not include graphics or power efficiency benchmarks, so those advantages are not quantified here. The Intel's higher boost clock (5.00 GHz vs 4.30 GHz) does not translate into a single-core win, reinforcing that the EPYC's single-thread performance is stronger despite a lower clock.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The EPYC 9274F uses AMD's Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Genoa, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It packs 24 cores and 48 threads, with a base clock of 4.05 GHz and a boost of 4.30 GHz. The Intel Core 5 120U uses Raptor Lake, specifically Raptor Lake-U, on Intel's 10 nm process. It has 10 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 1.40 GHz and a boost of 5.00 GHz. The EPYC's transistor count is recorded at 52,560 million, spread across eight 72 mm² dies, while the Intel's transistor count and die size are not listed.

Cache hierarchies differ sharply. The EPYC provides 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, plus a massive 256 MB shared L3 cache. The Intel offers 80 KB of L1 and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, but only 12 MB of shared L3. The EPYC's L3 is over 21 times larger. Memory support also diverges: the EPYC uses DDR5 with a twelve-channel bus and 460.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus, with no bandwidth figure recorded. The EPYC also supports ECC memory, while the Intel does not.

PCIe connectivity is another differentiator. The EPYC provides Gen 5 with 128 lanes, while the Intel offers Gen 4 with 8 lanes. The EPYC has no integrated graphics, while the Intel includes Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. The EPYC is designed for server and workstation sockets (AMD Socket SP5), while the Intel is a mobile part on BGA 1744. These architectural choices explain the benchmark results: the EPYC's larger core count, cache, and memory bandwidth are built for throughput, while the Intel's higher boost clock and integrated graphics target efficiency and portability.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD EPYC 9274F | Intel Core 5 120U |

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

| Manufacturer | AMD | Intel |

| Series | EPYC 9004 series | Not specified |

| Cores | 24 | 10 |

| Threads | 48 | 12 |

| Base clock | 4.05 GHz | 1.40 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.30 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 320 W | 15 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP5 | Intel BGA 1744 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Genoa | Raptor Lake-U |

| Generation | EPYC (Zen 4 (Genoa)) | Core 5 (Raptor Lake-U) |

| Process node | 5 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 52,560 million | Not recorded |

| Die size | 8x 72 mm² | Not recorded |

| L1 cache per core | 64 KB | 80 KB |

| L2 cache per core | 1 MB | 1.25 MB |

| L3 cache shared | 256 MB | 12 MB |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory bus | Twelve-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 460.8 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 128 lanes | Gen 4, 8 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | None | Iris Xe Graphics 80EU |

| Market segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

| Release date | 2022-11-09 | 2024-01-07 |

| Launch MSRP | $3060 | Not recorded |

| Part number | 100-100000794 | SRM7P |

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 9274F has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the Intel Core 5 120U has 10 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 5 120U boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the AMD EPYC 9274F boosts to 4.30 GHz.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD EPYC 9274F has 256 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core 5 120U has 12 MB.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 9274F supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core 5 120U does not.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core 5 120U includes Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, while the AMD EPYC 9274F has no integrated graphics.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD EPYC 9274F has an average benchmark score of 18189, while the Intel Core 5 120U scores 17898.

The Verdict

The benchmark results leave no room for doubt. The AMD EPYC 9274F wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, with the smallest margin being 264.9% in R15 single-core and the largest 844.3% in R23 multi-core. The Intel Core 5 120U does not win a single recorded benchmark. For users prioritizing compute performance, the EPYC is the only choice based on this data. The Intel's integrated graphics and 15W TDP are notable features, but they are not measured in the Cinebench suite. The EPYC's 320W TDP and server socket indicate a different use case, but the recorded scores show that for any Cinebench workload, the EPYC is overwhelmingly faster. The verdict is straightforward: the EPYC 9274F is the superior processor in every measured category.