EPYC 7H12 vs Core i7-8700B

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i7-8700B
2018
6 cores / 12 threads, 65 Watt
7.72
EPYC 7H12
2019
64 cores / 128 threads, 280 Watt
45.02
+483%

EPYC 7H12 outperforms i7-8700B by a whopping 483% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i7-8700B and EPYC 7H12 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking89337
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation13.1223.46
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
SeriesIntel Core i7AMD EPYC
Architecture codenameCoffee Lake (2017−2019)Zen 2 (2019−2020)
Release date2 April 2018 (6 years ago)18 September 2019 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$303no data
Current price$172 (0.6x MSRP)$1750

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 7H12 has 79% better value for money than i7-8700B.

Detailed specifications

Core i7-8700B and EPYC 7H12 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores6 (Hexa-Core)64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)
Threads12128
Base clock speed3.2 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz3.3 GHz
Bus support4 × 8 GT/sno data
L1 cache384 KB4 MB
L2 cache1.5 MB32 MB
L3 cache12 MB (shared)256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die size149 mm2192 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplierNoYes

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-8700B and EPYC 7H12 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1 (Uniprocessor)2 (Multiprocessor)
SocketIntel BGA 1440TR4
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt280 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-8700B and EPYC 7H12. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
TSX+no data
SIPP+no data

Security technologies

Core i7-8700B and EPYC 7H12 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-8700B and EPYC 7H12 are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno data+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-8700B and EPYC 7H12. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2666DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory size64 GB4 TiB
Max memory channels28
Maximum memory bandwidth42.671 GB/s204.763 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel UHD Graphics 630no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-8700B and EPYC 7H12.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

i7-8700B 7.72
EPYC 7H12 45.02
+483%

EPYC 7H12 outperforms Core i7-8700B by 483% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

i7-8700B 11936
EPYC 7H12 69633
+483%

EPYC 7H12 outperforms Core i7-8700B by 483% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.72 45.02
Recency 2 April 2018 18 September 2019
Physical cores 6 64
Threads 12 128
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 280 Watt

i7-8700B has 330.8% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7H12, on the other hand, has a 483.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, 966.7% more physical cores and 966.7% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7H12 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i7-8700B in performance tests.

Note that Core i7-8700B is a desktop processor while EPYC 7H12 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-8700B and EPYC 7H12, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Core i7-8700B
Core i7-8700B
AMD EPYC 7H12
EPYC 7H12

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.2 29 votes

Rate Core i7-8700B on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 450 votes

Rate EPYC 7H12 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i7-8700B or EPYC 7H12, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.