AMD EPYC 9274F vs Intel Core i7-8700 Comparison

The Intel Core i7-8700 and the AMD EPYC 9274F occupy opposite ends of the computing spectrum, yet benchmark data places them within a fraction of a percent of each other in aggregate performance. The i7-8700 averages a benchmark score of 18,223, while the EPYC 9274F averages 18,189, a delta of just 0.2% in favor of the Intel part. However, this near-parity in overall average masks a complete divergence in workload characteristics. The data shows that in every single head-to-head benchmark collected, the AMD EPYC 9274F wins decisively, often by margins exceeding 80%. The Intel part’s comparable average score is likely buoyed by its wins in other benchmark categories not directly compared here, such as PassMark tests, where it scores 187,009 in data compression and 44,881 in integer math.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 9274F dominates the Intel Core i7-8700 in every direct comparison available. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC scores 6,338 against the i7-8700’s 1,091, a difference of -82.8% for the Intel chip. The single-core test tells a similar story, with the EPYC at 894 and the i7-8700 at 153, again a -82.9% delta. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core results show the EPYC at 26,411 versus the i7-8700’s 4,548, while single-core scores are 3,728 and 641 respectively. The pattern holds in Cinebench R23, where the EPYC achieves 62,884 multi-core and 8,877 single-core, against the i7-8700’s 10,829 and 1,528.

The deltas are remarkably consistent across all six tests, hovering around -82.8%. This consistency indicates that the performance gap is not workload-specific but rather a fundamental throughput advantage. The EPYC’s single-core lead is particularly striking; it outperforms the i7-8700 by roughly 5.8 times in R23 single-core. This suggests the EPYC’s architectural efficiency per thread is vastly superior, not just its core count. While the i7-8700 has 6 cores and 12 threads, the EPYC has 24 cores and 48 threads, but the single-core advantage proves that the gap is not purely a matter of scale. The Intel part’s higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz does not compensate for the Zen 4 core design’s higher instructions-per-clock.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two processors is vast, stemming from different design goals and manufacturing eras. The Intel Core i7-8700 is built on Intel’s 14 nm process with a die size of 154 mm², while the AMD EPYC 9274F uses TSMC’s 5 nm node, with a die configuration of 8x 72 mm². The EPYC’s transistor count is listed at 52,560 million, a figure the i7-8700 does not report. The core designs differ fundamentally: Coffee Lake versus Zen 4 (Genoa). The EPYC supports 24 cores and 48 threads, quadrupling the i7-8700’s 6 cores and 12 threads.

Cache hierarchies are similarly divergent. Both parts feature 64 KB of L1 cache per core, but the L2 cache differs: the i7-8700 has 256 KB per core, while the EPYC has 1 MB per core. L3 cache is a major differentiator, with the i7-8700 offering 12 MB shared, while the EPYC provides 256 MB shared. Memory support also separates them: the i7-8700 uses DDR4 on a dual-channel bus with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the EPYC uses DDR5 on a twelve-channel bus with 460.8 GB/s. The EPYC also supports ECC memory, a feature the i7-8700 lacks. PCIe capabilities differ as well, with the i7-8700 offering Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only) versus the EPYC’s Gen 5 with 128 lanes. The i7-8700 includes integrated UHD Graphics 630, while the EPYC has no integrated graphics. Production status and release dates further reflect their positions: the i7-8700 is end-of-life, released in October 2017, while the EPYC is active, released in November 2022.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 9274F is significantly faster in single-core tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 8,877 against the Intel Core i7-8700’s 1,528, a delta of -82.8% for the Intel part.

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

A: The Intel Core i7-8700 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the AMD EPYC 9274F has 24 cores and 48 threads.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core i7-8700 supports dual-channel DDR4 with a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The AMD EPYC 9274F supports twelve-channel DDR5 with a bandwidth of 460.8 GB/s.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the AMD EPYC 9274F supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i7-8700 does not.

Q: What is the L3 cache size for each?

A: The Intel Core i7-8700 has 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD EPYC 9274F has 256 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i7-8700 has a higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz, compared to the AMD EPYC 9274F’s boost clock of 4.30 GHz.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. The core count differs: 6 for the i7-8700 versus 24 for the EPYC. Threads are 12 versus 48. Base clocks are 3.20 GHz for Intel and 4.05 GHz for AMD. Boost clocks are 4.60 GHz for Intel and 4.30 GHz for AMD. TDP is 65 watts for the i7-8700 and 320 watts for the EPYC. Sockets are Intel Socket 1151 versus AMD Socket SP5. Architecture is Coffee Lake versus Zen 4, with codenames Coffee Lake and Genoa respectively. Process nodes are 14 nm (Intel foundry) versus 5 nm (TSMC foundry). The transistor count is not specified for the i7-8700, but the EPYC lists 52,560 million. Die size is 154 mm² for Intel versus 8x 72 mm² for AMD. L2 cache is 256 KB per core versus 1 MB per core. L3 cache is 12 MB shared versus 256 MB shared. Memory support is DDR4 versus DDR5, with dual-channel versus twelve-channel buses. Memory bandwidth is 42.7 GB/s versus 460.8 GB/s. ECC memory is false versus true. PCIe is Gen 3, 16 lanes versus Gen 5, 128 lanes. Integrated graphics are present on the Intel part (UHD Graphics 630) but absent on the AMD part. Market segments are Desktop versus Server/Workstation. Production status is End-of-life versus Active. Release dates are October 2017 versus November 2022. Launch MSRP is $303 for the i7-8700 and $3060 for the EPYC.

The Verdict

Benchmark results indicate that the AMD EPYC 9274F is the superior processor in every direct comparison. It wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, with deltas consistently around -82.8% against the Intel Core i7-8700. The EPYC’s single-core advantage is notable, as it is not merely a multi-core brute force; it outperforms the i7-8700 by 5.8 times in Cinebench R23 single-core. The EPYC also offers substantially more cores, threads, cache, memory bandwidth, and PCIe lanes. However, the i7-8700 has a higher boost clock, a lower TDP, and integrated graphics. The data does not favor the i7-8700 in any computational workload measured here. The EPYC’s 24 cores and 48 threads, combined with 256 MB of L3 cache and 460.8 GB/s memory bandwidth, make it vastly more capable for heavy parallel processing. The i7-8700’s only advantages are its 4.60 GHz boost clock, which does not translate into benchmark wins, and its 65-watt TDP, which suggests lower power consumption.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 9274F wins in all measured benchmark categories. This includes Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both multi-core and single-core tests. The EPYC’s 6,338 R15 multi-core score versus the i7-8700’s 1,091 shows a massive throughput advantage. Similarly, its 8,877 R23 single-core score against 1,528 shows per-thread efficiency. The EPYC’s 460.8 GB/s memory bandwidth and 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes indicate it is designed for data-intensive server workloads. The Intel Core i7-8700, by contrast, does not win any head-to-head benchmark in this data set. Its strengths are qualitative: it has integrated graphics, a lower TDP of 65 watts, and a higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz. It also has a lower launch MSRP of $303 versus $3060 for the EPYC. The i7-8700’s 42.7 GB/s memory bandwidth and 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes are suited for a desktop platform. For users requiring the highest multi-threaded performance, data compression, or encryption throughput, the EPYC is the clear choice based on the benchmark scores. The i7-8700 remains relevant only for scenarios where its integrated graphics or lower power envelope are prioritized, though no benchmark data supports a performance win for the Intel part.