AMD EPYC 9654P vs Intel Core i5-11600 Comparison

Intel Core i5-11600 vs AMD EPYC 9654P

The Intel Core i5-11600 and AMD EPYC 9654P occupy opposite ends of the computing spectrum, yet their average benchmark scores sit nearly identical — 24563 for the Intel and 24465 for the AMD, a 0.4% gap. That statistical tie masks a dramatic split: the EPYC wins every head-to-head benchmark in this comparison, while the i5-11600 counters in areas the EPYC never targets. The data shows a 6-core desktop chip from 2021 facing a 96-core server monster from 2022, and the results are as lopsided as the core counts suggest.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD EPYC 9654P dominates the Cinebench suite with absolute consistency. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the EPYC scores 9966 against the i5-11600’s 1538, a delta of -84.6% for the Intel part. That same -84.6% delta repeats across every Cinebench test — R15 singlecore (1406 vs 217), R20 multicore (41527 vs 6412), R20 singlecore (5862 vs 905), R23 multicore (98875 vs 15269), and R23 singlecore (13958 vs 2155). The uniformity of that deltaPct across both single- and multi-threaded tests is striking; the EPYC does not merely scale better with more cores, it wins outright per-thread as well.

Single-core performance tells a nuanced story. The i5-11600 boosts to 4.80 GHz, while the EPYC boosts to 3.70 GHz. Yet the EPYC’s Zen 4 architecture delivers a Cinebench R23 singlecore score of 13958, over six times the i5-11600’s 2155. Clock speed alone does not explain a 6.5x single-thread advantage; the EPYC’s 5 nm process and newer microarchitecture clearly boost IPC far beyond the Rocket Lake design. The i5-11600’s 14 nm node and 2021 release date put it at a generational disadvantage that raw frequency cannot overcome.

Multi-threaded workloads amplify the gap further. The EPYC’s 96 cores and 192 threads produce a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 98875, versus 15269 for the i5-11600’s 6 cores and 12 threads. That is roughly 6.5x more performance in the flagship render test. The EPYC also posts 41527 in Cinebench R20 multicore against 6412, and 9966 in R15 multicore against 1538. Every multi-threaded result shows the same order of magnitude difference, driven by 16x the core count and 16x the thread count.

The head-to-head table shows winsA equal to 0 and winsB equal to 6 — a clean sweep for AMD. No benchmark in this comparison favors Intel. The i5-11600 does have a higher boost clock (4.80 vs 3.70 GHz) and a lower TDP (65 vs 360 W), but those physical attributes do not translate into any benchmark victory here. The EPYC’s 384 MB of L3 cache versus the i5-11600’s 12 MB shared L3 also contributes to its dominance in cache-sensitive workloads, though the head-to-head data does not isolate cache effects directly.

The Verdict

The data settles this decisively: the AMD EPYC 9654P wins every benchmark in the comparison, with a minimum delta of -84.6% against the Intel Core i5-11600. There is no workload category in the provided test suite where the i5-11600 comes out ahead. The EPYC’s 96 cores, 192 threads, and 384 MB L3 cache produce results that the 6-core, 12-thread, 12 MB L3 i5-11600 cannot approach.

Who should pick the i5-11600? Strictly from the data, only a buyer who requires a desktop platform with 65 W TDP, DDR4 memory support, and an Intel Socket 1200 footprint — and who never runs the Cinebench workloads listed. The i5-11600’s launch MSRP is $213, and its percentileVsAllCpus of 77 matches the EPYC’s 77, meaning both chips rank at the same overall level across all CPUs in the database. That parity in percentile is a statistical artifact of averaging; the benchmark distribution shows the EPYC’s scores are far higher in every measured test.

Who should pick the EPYC 9654P? Anyone running multi-threaded Cinebench workloads, given its 98875 R23 multicore score. The EPYC also wins single-core tests by a wide margin, so even lightly threaded tasks favor it. The 360 W TDP, twelve-channel DDR5 memory bus, and 460.8 GB/s memory bandwidth position it for server and workstation use, which aligns with its marketSegment of Server/Workstation. The i5-11600’s marketSegment is Desktop, and its end-of-life production status further narrows its appeal.

The verdict is not close. The EPYC 9654P is the superior processor in every benchmark metric available. The i5-11600 remains competitive only in the sense that its average benchmark score (24563) is within 0.4% of the EPYC’s (24465) — but that average is pulled up by PassMark tests the EPYC does not have scores for in this comparison, while the head-to-head Cinebench results are uniformly one-sided.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 9654P wins all six head-to-head benchmarks: Cinebench R15 multicore and singlecore, R20 multicore and singlecore, and R23 multicore and singlecore. Its wins span both multi-threaded and single-threaded tests, meaning it offers no weakness in the render workloads measured. The EPYC’s 5 nm process, TSMC foundry, and 78,840 million transistors provide the physical basis for this performance, alongside its 96 cores and 192 threads.

The Intel Core i5-11600 has no benchmark wins in this comparison. Its strengths are qualitative: a lower TDP of 65 W (versus 360 W), DDR4 memory support (versus DDR5), and a desktop socket (Intel Socket 1200 versus AMD Socket SP5). For users constrained to a desktop platform with 65 W cooling, the i5-11600 is the only viable option between these two, because the EPYC requires server infrastructure. The i5-11600 also has a higher boost clock (4.80 GHz) and a larger L1 cache per core (80 KB versus 64 KB), but these do not translate into any measured win.

Use-case split: the EPYC 9654P suits server and workstation deployments where multi-threaded throughput, ECC memory support, and high memory bandwidth (460.8 GB/s) matter. The i5-11600 suits a desktop build with DDR4 memory and a 65 W thermal envelope, accepting that its performance in Cinebench falls 84.6% behind in every test. The i5-11600’s PassMark scores — such as 60158 in integer math, 35478 in floating point math, and 218062 in data compression — are not compared head-to-head with the EPYC, so they cannot be used to claim a win. The data only supports EPYC wins in the six Cinebench tests.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher single-core Cinebench R23 score?

A: The AMD EPYC 9654P scores 13958, while the Intel Core i5-11600 scores 2155. The EPYC leads by a delta of -84.6% (from the Intel perspective).

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

A: The Intel Core i5-11600 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The AMD EPYC 9654P has 96 cores and 192 threads.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each chip?

A: The i5-11600 has an average benchmark score of 24563, and the EPYC 9654P has 24465. The nearest rival data shows a 0.4% difference, with the i5-11600 slightly ahead in that aggregate metric.

Q: Does the EPYC 9654P support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the AMD EPYC 9654P has ECC memory support. The Intel Core i5-11600 does not.

Q: What process nodes are used?

A: The Intel Core i5-11600 uses Intel’s 14 nm process. The AMD EPYC 9654P uses TSMC’s 5 nm process.

Q: Which CPU has more L3 cache?

A: The AMD EPYC 9654P has 384 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core i5-11600 has 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i5-11600 is built on Rocket Lake architecture, using a 14 nm process from Intel’s own foundry. It features 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The die size is 276 mm², and the cache hierarchy includes 80 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR4 over a dual-channel bus, providing 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. PCIe support is Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The socket is Intel Socket 1200, and the chip is marked end-of-life with a launch MSRP of $213.

The AMD EPYC 9654P is built on Zen 4 architecture (codenamed Genoa) for the EPYC 9004 series. It uses TSMC’s 5 nm process and contains 78,840 million transistors across 12 chiplets, each 72 mm². The CPU has 96 cores and 192 threads, with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. Cache includes 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and a massive 384 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR5 over a twelve-channel bus, delivering 460.8 GB/s bandwidth — nine times the i5-11600’s 51.2 GB/s. ECC memory is supported. PCIe is Gen 5 with 128 lanes from the CPU. The socket is AMD Socket SP5, production status is active, and the launch MSRP is $10625.

Key architectural differences: the EPYC’s 5 nm process versus the i5-11600’s 14 nm explains much of the performance gap, as does the 16x core count difference. The EPYC’s 384 MB L3 is 32 times larger than the i5-11600’s 12 MB. Memory channels differ dramatically: twelve-channel DDR5 versus dual-channel DDR4. PCIe generations differ (Gen 5 versus Gen 4), and lane counts differ (128 versus 20). The EPYC supports ECC memory; the i5-11600 does not. The i5-11600 has a higher boost clock (4.80 vs 3.70 GHz) and a smaller L1 cache per core (80 KB vs 64 KB), but these are the only areas where the Intel part shows a physical advantage. The EPYC’s transistor count (78,840 million) versus the i5-11600’s unspecified transistor count further underscores the generational leap. The release dates — March 2021 for Intel, November 2022 for AMD — place the EPYC nearly two years newer, which aligns with its architectural superiority in the benchmark data.