7-Zip Benchmark: Intel vs AMD CPU Performance

The built-in 7-Zip benchmark is an industry-standard utility for measuring integer math performance, memory latency, and multi-threaded processor throughput through data compression and decompression routines. Historically, AMD and Intel handle these workloads differently due to divergent architectural choices regarding cache hierarchies, simultaneous multithreading, and core configurations. This article compares 7-Zip benchmark performance between Intel and AMD processors, analyzing how each brand’s microarchitecture impacts compression and decompression ratings.

Understanding the 7-Zip Benchmark Workload

The 7-Zip benchmark evaluates processor speed in Millions of Instructions Per Second (MIPS) across two distinct operations:

• Compression: This workload is computationally complex and heavily dependent on memory latency, cache bandwidth, and branch prediction. It utilizes hashing and searching algorithms to detect duplicate data, making it sensitive to single-core clock speeds and memory subsystem performance.
• Decompression: This workload primarily stresses the processor's integer execution pipelines and raw multi-threaded throughput. It requires minimal memory access relative to compression and scales almost linearly with physical and logical core counts.

AMD Architecture Performance (Zen Series)

AMD’s Zen architectures (Zen 3, Zen 4, and Zen 5) consistently excel in the 7-Zip benchmark, particularly in decompression workloads.

• Symmetrical Core Design: AMD desktop processors (such as the Ryzen 7 and Ryzen 9 series) feature identical, high-performance cores with Simultaneous Multithreading (SMT). Because every core features full hardware execution resources, multi-threaded integer throughput scales efficiently without workload bottlenecks.
• Large L3 Cache Pools: AMD's chiplet designs incorporate substantial L3 cache capacities, including X3D variants with 3D V-Cache. A larger cache allows the CPU to store larger dictionary sizes on-die during compression passes, reducing main-memory latency penalties and yielding higher compression MIPS scores.
• Decompression Dominance: Zen processors regularly outperform Intel counterparts of equivalent core tiers in decompression MIPS, driven by efficient branch handling, deep instruction reorder buffers, and full-fat SMT threads.

Intel Architecture Performance (Hybrid Core Topologies)

Intel's recent microarchitectures (Alder Lake, Raptor Lake, and newer desktop chips) rely on a hybrid architecture combining Performance-cores (P-cores) with Efficient-cores (E-cores).

• Compression Competitiveness: Intel often closes the gap or leads in compression workloads due to high peak single-core clock frequencies on P-cores, robust monolithic memory controllers, and aggressive prefetching. The low memory latency typical of Intel's monolithic dies benefits dictionary building during compression.
• E-Core Utilization in Decompression: Intel’s E-cores lack Hyper-Threading (SMT). While they contribute significant throughput to parallel workloads, a 24-core Intel processor (8 P-cores + 16 E-cores) provides 32 threads, whereas a 16-core AMD processor provides 32 full-performance threads. Consequently, Intel’s decompression MIPS often falls behind AMD’s flagship Ryzen 9 and Threadripper parts on a per-thread efficiency basis.
• Thread Director Scaling: In multi-gigabyte dictionary runs, scheduling delays between P-cores and E-cores can cause minor variance in total MIPS output if data transitions between core clusters.

Head-to-Head Comparison Summary

Overall, modern AMD processors hold an architectural advantage in 7-Zip multi-threaded decompression tests due to symmetrical core layouts, full multithreading, and large L3 caches. Intel remains highly competitive in compression metrics by leveraging high single-core clock ceilings and fast memory subsystems.