AMD EPYC 9474F vs Intel Core 5 120 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results in this comparison are unambiguous. Across every recorded Cinebench test, the AMD EPYC 9474F dominates the Intel Core 5 120 by a consistent margin. The database shows the EPYC 9474F winning all six head-to-head tests, with the Intel part failing to claim a single victory.

The largest gap appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the AMD EPYC 9474F scores 86,790 against the Intel Core 5 120's 18,255. That represents a 79% deficit for the Intel chip, a margin that reflects the enormous core-count difference between these two parts. The same 79% delta appears across every single test in the head-to-head set, which is remarkable for its consistency. Whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded, the relative gap remains identical in percentage terms.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD EPYC 9474F posts 8,748 while the Intel Core 5 120 manages 1,840. The R15 single-core test shows 1,234 for the EPYC versus 259 for the Core 5. Cinebench R20 follows the same pattern: 36,451 versus 7,667 in multi-core, and 5,145 versus 1,082 in single-core.

The fact that the delta is 79% in every test suggests a systematic scaling factor rather than workload-specific behavior. This is not a case where one chip wins in certain applications and loses in others. The EPYC 9474F is simply faster everywhere the two were measured together.

Looking at the broader benchmark database, both processors sit at the 77th percentile when compared against all CPUs. Their average benchmark scores are close: the Intel Core 5 120 averages 25,362, while the AMD EPYC 9474F averages 25,103. Those averages, however, include a much wider set of tests for the Intel part, which has 17 recorded benchmarks compared to only 6 for the AMD processor.

The Intel Core 5 120's nearest rivals in the database are illuminating. The AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D scores 25,365, essentially identical to the Core 5's 25,362 with a delta of 0%. The Intel Core i7-11700KF trails by 0.2%, and the AMD Ryzen 7 7840U is ahead by 0.3%. These are all mainstream desktop or mobile processors, which contextualizes where the Core 5 120 sits in the performance hierarchy.

The AMD EPYC 9474F's nearest rivals are also telling. The AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS scores 25,147, a 0.2% deficit. The Ryzen 7 6800H is 0.4% behind, while the Ryzen 5 8400F and Ryzen 5 7500F are 0.4% and 0.6% ahead respectively. These are mobile and mainstream desktop chips, not server processors. The EPYC's average benchmark score is dragged down by the limited test set available for it, which only includes Cinebench workloads.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is fundamental. The Intel Core 5 120 uses Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake Refresh generation, built on Intel's 10 nm process. The AMD EPYC 9474F uses Zen 4 architecture under the Genoa codename, manufactured on TSMC's 5 nm node. The process node difference alone explains a substantial portion of the efficiency and density gap between these parts.

Core counts diverge sharply. The Intel part offers 6 cores and 12 threads, while the AMD EPYC 9474F provides 48 cores and 96 threads. That is an 8x difference in core count and thread count. The EPYC's base clock of 3.60 GHz is higher than the Core 5's 2.50 GHz, though the Intel chip boosts higher at 4.50 GHz versus 4.10 GHz for the AMD part. The Intel chip's higher boost clock helps in lightly threaded scenarios, but it cannot overcome the massive core deficit in multi-threaded work.

Cache hierarchies differ in scale as well as design. The Intel Core 5 120 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD EPYC 9474F has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 256 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC's L3 is more than 14 times larger, which matters enormously for server workloads with large working sets.

The die configuration is another differentiator. The Intel chip uses a 163 mm² monolithic die, while the AMD EPYC 9474F uses a chiplet design with 8 dies at 72 mm² each. The EPYC packs 52,560 million transistors, a figure the database does not list for the Intel part.

Memory support reflects their different market positions. The Intel Core 5 120 supports both DDR4 and DDR5 across a dual-channel memory bus, with no ECC support. The AMD EPYC 9474F supports DDR5 only, across a twelve-channel memory bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 460.8 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on the EPYC, which is essential for server reliability.

PCIe connectivity also diverges. The Intel part provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The AMD EPYC 9474F provides Gen 5 with 128 lanes from the CPU, an 8x expansion in available I/O bandwidth. The EPYC also has no integrated graphics, while the Intel Core 5 120 includes UHD Graphics 730.

The socket situation is entirely different: Intel Socket 1700 for the Core 5 120, AMD Socket SP5 for the EPYC 9474F. The Intel part is marked for the desktop market segment, while the EPYC targets server and workstation deployments.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 9474F wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. That is the simple summary. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 86,790 versus 18,255 places the EPYC firmly in a different performance class for heavily threaded rendering workloads. The 79% lead in every recorded test means there is no scenario in the head-to-head data where the Intel Core 5 120 comes out ahead.

The Intel Core 5 120 does have strengths in the broader database. Its PassMark single-thread score of 3,595 is competitive, and its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,577 is respectable for a desktop part. The higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz helps in latency-sensitive applications. Its 65 W TDP makes it suitable for systems where power and cooling are constrained, though the database does not provide direct power efficiency measurements.

The AMD EPYC 9474F's strengths are obvious in multi-threaded throughput. The 96 threads and 256 MB of L3 cache make it well suited for database workloads, virtualization, scientific computing, and large-scale compilation. The twelve-channel DDR5 memory bus with 460.8 GB/s bandwidth provides memory throughput that the Intel part cannot approach. The 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes allow massive I/O expansion for storage and networking.

For desktop users running single-threaded applications, the Intel Core 5 120 is the more appropriate choice, given its market segment and lower platform complexity. For server deployments where thread count, memory bandwidth, and I/O capacity dominate, the EPYC 9474F is the obvious pick. The benchmark data supports this split cleanly: the EPYC wins everything measured, but the two chips are aimed at entirely different workloads.

The percentile ranking of 77 for both processors is a curiosity. Both sit at the same percentile versus all CPUs, despite the EPYC's overwhelming head-to-head advantage. This is because the percentile calculation uses average benchmark scores across different test sets, and the Intel part has many more recorded tests in the database.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD EPYC 9474F in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The EPYC 9474F scores 86,790 compared to the Intel Core 5 120's 18,255, a 79% lead for the AMD processor.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 120 win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The database records six head-to-head tests, all won by the AMD EPYC 9474F with a 79% delta in every case.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 9474F has 48 cores and 96 threads, while the Intel Core 5 120 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the L3 cache size difference?

A: The AMD EPYC 9474F has 256 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core 5 120 has 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD EPYC 9474F supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 5 120 does not.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core 5 120 averages 25,362, and the AMD EPYC 9474F averages 25,103, a difference of about 1% despite the EPYC's dominance in the head-to-head tests.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 120 | AMD EPYC 9474F |

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

| Cores | 6 | 48 |

| Threads | 12 | 96 |

| Base clock | 2.50 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.50 GHz | 4.10 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 360 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | AMD Socket SP5 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Zen 4 |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-R | Genoa |

| Process node | 10 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die size | 163 mm² | 8x 72 mm² |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 52,560 million |

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

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

| L3 cache | 18 MB (shared) | 256 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

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

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

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 128 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | None |

| Market segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Release date | 2025-07-30 | 2022-11-09 |

| Launch MSRP | $211 | $6780 |

| Part number | SA35V | 100-100000788 |