AMD EPYC 9454P vs Intel Core i5-11600K Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a complete sweep for the AMD EPYC 9454P across all eight shared benchmark tests. The most striking pattern is the consistency of the Cinebench deltas, where the EPYC 9454P leads by roughly 392% in every subtest. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 9454P scores 81,492 against the Core i5-11600K’s 16,552, a margin of 392.3%. The single-core R23 result shows 11,504 versus 2,336, a 392.5% advantage for the AMD part. This near-identical percentage across R15, R20, and R23 suggests the performance gap is driven by fundamental architectural differences rather than workload-specific scaling.

The Geekbench results tell a different story in magnitude. In Geekbench multi-core, the EPYC 9454P scores 19,941 against 9,238 for the Intel chip, a 115.9% lead. However, in Geekbench single-core, the gap narrows dramatically: 2,011 versus 1,973, a mere 1.9% difference. This single-core result is the closest margin in the entire head-to-head set, indicating that per-thread performance is nearly equivalent despite the massive core-count disparity.

The Cinebench single-core margins deserve closer inspection. The EPYC 9454P’s base clock of 2.75 GHz and boost clock of 3.80 GHz are both lower than the Core i5-11600K’s 3.90 GHz base and 4.90 GHz boost, yet the AMD part still wins single-core Cinebench by 392.5%. This outcome reflects the IPC efficiency of Zen 4 at a 5 nm process node versus Rocket Lake’s 14 nm design, though the raw clock disadvantage does not translate into a loss in any recorded test.

The multi-core Cinebench results scale almost perfectly with core count. The EPYC 9454P has 48 cores and 96 threads, while the Core i5-11600K has 6 cores and 12 threads, an 8x core and thread ratio. The observed 392.4% delta in Cinebench R15 multi-core is roughly half of what a pure core-count scaling would suggest, indicating that per-core throughput in this workload is comparable, with the EPYC’s advantage stemming from having eight times the parallel resources rather than from superior per-core efficiency.

Geekbench multi-core shows a smaller relative gap at 115.9%, which suggests that this benchmark is less sensitive to raw core count or that memory bandwidth constraints play a role. The EPYC 9454P’s twelve-channel DDR5 memory support with 460.8 GB/s bandwidth versus the Core i5-11600K’s dual-channel DDR4 at 51.2 GB/s provides a nine-fold bandwidth advantage, yet the Geekbench multi-core delta is only 115.9%, implying the workload does not fully saturate memory channels.

The wins tally stands at 8 for the AMD EPYC 9454P and 0 for the Intel Core i5-11600K. No benchmark in the shared set favors the Intel part, even in single-threaded tests where the Core i5-11600K’s higher boost clock might be expected to help. The 1.9% Geekbench single-core margin is the only result under double digits, and it still goes to the EPYC.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 9454P dominates every category where the two processors overlap. For multi-threaded workloads, the Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core scores show leads of 392.4%, 392.4%, and 392.3% respectively. This makes the EPYC the clear choice for rendering, scientific simulation, or any workload that scales across 48 cores and 96 threads. The data shows no scenario in the shared benchmark suite where the Intel part takes a win, so the use-case split must be inferred from the magnitude of the deltas rather than from any Intel victory.

Single-core performance is the closest battleground. The Geekbench single-core result (2,011 versus 1,973, a 1.9% lead) suggests that for lightly threaded tasks, the two processors are nearly interchangeable. However, the Cinebench single-core results contradict this, with the EPYC winning by 392.5%. The discrepancy between Geekbench and Cinebench single-core likely stems from different instruction mixes, cache sensitivity, or boost behavior under load. Users prioritizing Geekbench-style single-thread performance would find the Core i5-11600K almost as capable, but the Cinebench data indicates the EPYC holds a commanding lead even with one thread active.

The Intel Core i5-11600K’s recorded strengths lie in areas not covered by the shared benchmark set. It has a higher base clock (3.90 GHz) and boost clock (4.90 GHz) than the EPYC, and it includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 750) whereas the EPYC has none. For a desktop user who needs a complete system without a discrete GPU, these factors matter, but they are not reflected in the benchmark scores. The Core i5-11600K also supports an unlocked multiplier, allowing manual overclocking, while the EPYC 9454P is multiplier-locked.

The EPYC 9454P’s server-oriented features define its winning envelope. Its 256 MB of shared L3 cache, 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and twelve-channel DDR5 memory with 460.8 GB/s bandwidth position it for enterprise workloads. The Core i5-11600K’s 12 MB shared L3 cache, 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, and dual-channel DDR4 at 51.2 GB/s are modest by comparison. The data shows the EPYC wins all shared benchmarks, but the practical use-case split is between server/workstation tasks that exploit massive parallelism and memory bandwidth versus desktop tasks where the Intel part’s higher clocks and integrated graphics may suffice.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 9454P outperforms the Intel Core i5-11600K in every shared test. The only competitive result is Geekbench single-core, where the EPYC leads by 1.9%, a margin that is effectively negligible for real-world single-threaded applications. Every other test shows a lead of at least 115.9% and as much as 392.5%. Anyone selecting a processor strictly on the basis of these recorded benchmarks would choose the EPYC 9454P without hesitation.

However, the data also reveals that these processors serve entirely different markets. The EPYC 9454P is a server/workstation part with 48 cores, 96 threads, and a 290 W TDP. The Core i5-11600K is a desktop part with 6 cores, 12 threads, and a 125 W TDP, now marked end-of-life. The Core i5-11600K’s only recorded advantages are its higher clock speeds, integrated graphics, unlocked multiplier, and lower TDP, none of which appear in the benchmark scores. The EPYC’s launch MSRP is $4598, but the database does not record a comparable price for the Intel part beyond its launch MSRP of $262.

The verdict for benchmark-focused buyers is clear: the EPYC 9454P wins all eight head-to-head comparisons. The verdict for desktop users is more nuanced. If the workload is single-threaded and resembles Geekbench, the Core i5-11600K is within 1.9% of the EPYC. If the workload is multi-threaded, the EPYC’s lead is overwhelming. The data supports the EPYC for any server, workstation, or content-creation workload that can use more than a handful of cores. The Core i5-11600K remains viable only for desktop scenarios where its integrated graphics, higher clocks, and overclocking headroom are relevant, none of which are captured in the shared benchmark suite.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 9454P wins all multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 81,492 versus 16,552 for the Intel Core i5-11600K, a lead of 392.3%. Geekbench multi-core shows a smaller but still decisive lead of 115.9% (19,941 versus 9,238).

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-11600K competitive in single-core tests?

A: In Geekbench single-core, the Core i5-11600K scores 1,973 versus 2,011 for the EPYC 9454P, a 1.9% difference. However, in Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC leads by 392.5% (11,504 versus 2,336), so the answer depends on which benchmark is considered.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The AMD EPYC 9454P has 48 cores and 96 threads. The Intel Core i5-11600K has 6 cores and 12 threads. This is an 8x difference in both cores and threads.

Q: How do the memory systems compare?

A: The EPYC 9454P supports DDR5 memory over a twelve-channel bus with 460.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Core i5-11600K supports DDR4 over a dual-channel bus with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. The EPYC also supports ECC memory, while the Intel part does not.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i5-11600K includes UHD Graphics 750. The AMD EPYC 9454P has no integrated graphics, as recorded in the database.

Q: What are the process nodes and architectures?

A: The EPYC 9454P uses a 5 nm process from TSMC with Zen 4 architecture (codename Genoa). The Core i5-11600K uses a 14 nm process from Intel with Rocket Lake architecture.

Architecture Differences

The AMD EPYC 9454P is built on Zen 4 architecture with the codename Genoa, manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC. It packs 52,560 million transistors across eight chiplets, each with a die size of 72 mm². The Intel Core i5-11600K uses Rocket Lake architecture on a 14 nm process from Intel, with a single die size of 276 mm². The transistor count for the Intel part is not recorded in the database.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The EPYC 9454P has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 256 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core i5-11600K has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC’s L3 cache is more than 21 times larger, which helps in multi-threaded workloads with large working sets.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The EPYC 9454P supports DDR5 memory over a twelve-channel interface, yielding 460.8 GB/s of bandwidth, and it supports ECC memory. The Core i5-11600K supports DDR4 over a dual-channel interface, yielding 51.2 GB/s, without ECC support. The EPYC also provides 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel part provides 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes.

The EPYC 9454P is a server/workstation part with an active production status, released on 2022-11-09. The Core i5-11600K is a desktop part with an end-of-life production status, released on 2021-03-15. The EPYC is multiplier-locked, while the Core i5-11600K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP5, and the Intel part uses Socket 1200.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 9454P | Intel Core i5-11600K |

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

| Series | EPYC 9004 series | Core 11th Gen |

| Manufacturer | AMD | Intel |

| Cores | 48 | 6 |

| Threads | 96 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 2.75 GHz | 3.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.80 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| TDP | 290 W | 125 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP5 | Intel Socket 1200 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Rocket Lake |

| Codename | Genoa | Rocket Lake |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 8x 72 mm² | 276 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 256 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bus | Twelve-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 460.8 GB/s | 51.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 128 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | None | UHD Graphics 750 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2022-11-09 | 2021-03-15 |

| Launch MSRP | $4598 | $262 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | 100-100000873 | SRKNU |