i3-1115G4E vs EPYC 8024P
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 8024P outperforms Core i3-1115G4E by a whopping 290% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 796 | 1892 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 22.62 | 3.73 |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Power efficiency | 5.47 | 8.41 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Siena (2023−2024) | Tiger Lake-U (2020−2021) |
| Release date | 18 September 2023 (2 years ago) | 2 September 2020 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $409 | $285 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
EPYC 8024P has 506% better value for money than i3-1115G4E.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
EPYC 8024P and Core i3-1115G4E 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 cores | 8 (Octa-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 16 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 3.9 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 32 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 73 mm2 | 144 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 75 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 8,875 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 8024P and Core i3-1115G4E 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | SP6 | Intel BGA 1449 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 90 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 8024P and Core i3-1115G4E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 8024P and Core i3-1115G4E are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 8024P and Core i3-1115G4E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR4, LPDDR4X |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | UHD Graphics G4 48EU |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 8024P and Core i3-1115G4E.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 96 | 4 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 11.67 | 2.99 |
| Recency | 18 September 2023 | 2 September 2020 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 2 |
| Threads | 16 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 90 Watt | 15 Watt |
EPYC 8024P has a 290% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
i3-1115G4E, on the other hand, has 500% lower power consumption.
The AMD EPYC 8024P is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Core i3-1115G4E in performance tests.
Be aware that EPYC 8024P is a server/workstation processor while Core i3-1115G4E is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
