i7-13700F vs EPYC 7543P

VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7543P
2021
32 cores / 64 threads, 225 Watt
41.98
+71.1%
Core i7-13700F
2023
16 cores / 24 threads, 65 Watt
24.54

EPYC 7543P outperforms Core i7-13700F by an impressive 71% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7543P and Core i7-13700F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking55208
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation13.2757.16
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesAMD EPYCno data
Power efficiency17.6635.73
Architecture codenameMilan (2021−2023)Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)
Release date12 January 2021 (3 years ago)4 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,730$359

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

i7-13700F has 331% better value for money than EPYC 7543P.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7543P and Core i7-13700F 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 cores32 (Dotriaconta-Core)16 (Hexadeca-Core)
Threads6424
Base clock speed2.8 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz5.2 GHz
Multiplier28no data
L1 cache2 MB80K (per core)
L2 cache16 MB2 MB (per core)
L3 cache256 MB (shared)30 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm+Intel 7 nm
Die size8x 81 mm2257 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
Number of transistors33,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7543P and Core i7-13700F 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 configuration11
SocketSP3FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7543P and Core i7-13700F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSX-+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

EPYC 7543P and Core i7-13700F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7543P and Core i7-13700F are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7543P and Core i7-13700F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR5-5600, DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size4 TiB192 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidth204.795 GB/s89.6 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/Ano data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7543P and Core i7-13700F.

PCIe version4.05.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanes12816

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.

EPYC 7543P 41.98
+71.1%
i7-13700F 24.54

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.

EPYC 7543P 66687
+71.1%
i7-13700F 38974

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 41.98 24.54
Recency 12 January 2021 4 January 2023
Physical cores 32 16
Threads 64 24
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 65 Watt

EPYC 7543P has a 71.1% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 166.7% more threads.

i7-13700F, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 246.2% lower power consumption.

The EPYC 7543P is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i7-13700F in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 7543P is a server/workstation processor while Core i7-13700F is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7543P and Core i7-13700F, 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.


AMD EPYC 7543P
EPYC 7543P
Intel Core i7-13700F
Core i7-13700F

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.


4.7 17 votes

Rate EPYC 7543P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 506 votes

Rate Core i7-13700F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7543P or Core i7-13700F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.