CPU Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7282 and Intel Core i9-9980XE occupy opposite ends of the computing spectrum, yet their average benchmark scores are nearly identical, with the EPYC 7282 posting a 7409 average against the Intel’s 7398, a negligible 0.2% difference. This makes for a fascinating comparison: a 16-core server processor built on a 7 nm node facing an 18-core desktop flagship on a 14 nm process, both landing in the 63rd percentile of all CPUs. The benchmark data reveals a consistent pattern of Intel wins across all six Cinebench tests, but the margins are uniformly slim, hovering around 4.3-4.4%. The real story lies in the architectural philosophy: AMD’s Rome design targets memory bandwidth and platform scalability, while Intel’s Skylake-X pushes raw clock speeds and single-thread performance.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i9-9980XE has 18 cores and 36 threads, compared to the AMD EPYC 7282’s 16 cores and 32 threads. Despite this 2-core advantage, Intel only leads by 4.3-4.4% in multi-core Cinebench tests, indicating AMD’s Zen 2 architecture delivers strong per-core efficiency.

Q: How do the single-core scores compare?

A: Intel wins every single-core test, with margins of 4.2% in Cinebench R15 (380 vs 364) and 4.3% in R20 and R23 (1587 vs 1518 and 3780 vs 3616, respectively). The Intel’s 4.50 GHz boost clock versus AMD’s 3.20 GHz boost gives it a clear advantage in lightly-threaded workloads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: Both processors are rated at 85.3 GB/s, but the AMD EPYC 7282 achieves this through an eight-channel DDR4 memory bus, while the Intel Core i9-9980XE uses a quad-channel configuration. The AMD also supports ECC memory, which the Intel does not.

Q: Which processor supports PCIe Gen 4?

A: The AMD EPYC 7282 is the only one of the two supporting PCIe Gen 4, offering 128 lanes (CPU only). The Intel Core i9-9980XE is limited to PCIe Gen 3 with 44 lanes, a significant difference for expansion-heavy server or workstation builds.

Q: What is the production status of each chip?

A: The AMD EPYC 7282 is listed as "Active" in production, while the Intel Core i9-9980XE is marked as "End-of-life." This suggests the AMD part has greater long-term availability for system integrators.

Q: Are these processors overclockable?

A: The Intel Core i9-9980XE has an unlocked multiplier, enabling overclocking. The AMD EPYC 7282’s multiplier is locked, meaning it runs at its specified clock speeds without user adjustment.

Architecture Differences

The AMD EPYC 7282 is built on TSMC’s 7 nm process, a substantial node advantage over Intel’s 14 nm manufacturing for the Core i9-9980XE. This process difference is reflected in transistor density: the AMD chip packs 7,600 million transistors across a die size of 2x 74 mm², while the Intel processor uses a single 484 mm² die. The EPYC 7282’s smaller, dual-die design is a hallmark of AMD’s Zen 2 "Rome" architecture, which employs a chiplet approach to improve yields and power efficiency.

Cache configurations differ markedly between the two. The AMD EPYC 7282 offers 64 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, with a total of 64 MB of L3 cache split across its dies (32 MB per die). In contrast, the Intel Core i9-9980XE provides 64 KB of L1 and a larger 1 MB of L2 per core, but only 24.75 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD’s larger L3 pool is advantageous for data-heavy server workloads, while Intel’s per-core L2 advantage may benefit certain latency-sensitive tasks.

Platform features further separate these CPUs. The AMD EPYC 7282 supports eight-channel memory and ECC, making it suitable for mission-critical server environments. It also offers 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, doubling the bandwidth of the Intel’s 44 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. The Intel Core i9-9980XE, with its quad-channel memory and no ECC support, targets high-end desktop enthusiasts who prioritize clock speed and overclocking headroom (its multiplier is unlocked) over server-grade reliability. The EPYC 7282’s TDP is 120 W versus Intel’s 165 W, a significant power efficiency advantage for dense server deployments.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i9-9980XE wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, but the margins are remarkably consistent and modest. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, Intel scores 2699 against AMD’s 2581, a 4.4% lead. The single-core R15 test shows Intel ahead by 4.2% (380 vs 364). Moving to Cinebench R20, Intel’s multi-core result of 11247 beats AMD’s 10758 by 4.3%, while single-core R20 sees Intel at 1587 versus AMD’s 1518, also a 4.3% gap.

Cinebench R23 repeats the same pattern: Intel leads multi-core with 26780 against 25616 (4.3%) and single-core with 3780 against 3616 (4.3%). This uniformity across all tests suggests a consistent per-core performance advantage for Intel, likely driven by its higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz compared to AMD’s 3.20 GHz. However, the fact that Intel’s 18-core, 36-thread configuration only manages a 4.3% multi-core lead over AMD’s 16-core, 32-thread part indicates that AMD’s Zen 2 architecture delivers superior scaling and efficiency per core.

The benchmark data also shows Intel’s Geekbench scores from its own test suite: 11270 multi-core and 1437 single-core, though no direct AMD comparison is available in the head-to-head table. The average benchmark scores tell the broader story: Intel’s 7398 average is nearly identical to AMD’s 7409, with the AMD part actually holding a 0.2% edge. This means that outside of Cinebench, the EPYC 7282 likely performs on par or slightly better in other workload types, as reflected in its rival list where it matches or beats the Intel i9-9990XE and other CPUs.

The Verdict

The data clearly indicates that the Intel Core i9-9980XE is the superior choice for Cinebench-based rendering workloads, winning every test by a consistent 4.2-4.4% margin. Its higher boost clock and 18 cores give it a tangible, if modest, performance edge in both single-threaded and multi-threaded benchmarks. Users whose primary applications are heavily dependent on Cinebench-style rendering will see real, measurable gains from the Intel part, despite its higher 165 W TDP and end-of-life production status.

However, the AMD EPYC 7282 is the more compelling platform choice for broader server and workstation deployments. Its 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, eight-channel ECC memory support, and 64 MB of L3 cache provide a foundation for scalability that the Intel part cannot match. The EPYC 7282 also offers a 45 W TDP advantage (120 W vs 165 W) and remains in active production, ensuring long-term availability. Its average benchmark score is essentially tied with Intel’s (7409 vs 7398), suggesting that in non-Cinebench workloads, the AMD part holds its own or even pulls ahead.

For a desktop enthusiast seeking maximum overclocking headroom and top single-thread performance, the Intel Core i9-9980XE is the clear pick. For a system builder prioritizing platform longevity, memory bandwidth, PCIe expansion, and power efficiency, the AMD EPYC 7282 is the data-supported recommendation. The choice ultimately hinges on whether the 4.3% Cinebench advantage justifies the trade-offs in platform features and power consumption.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 7282 | Intel Core i9-9980XE |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 16 | 18 |

| Threads | 32 | 36 |

| Base Clock | 2.80 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.20 GHz | 4.50 GHz |

| TDP | 120 W | 165 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | Intel Socket 2066 |

| Process Node | 7 nm (TSMC) | 14 nm (Intel) |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 32 MB per die (64 MB total) | 24.75 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Eight-channel | Quad-channel |

| ECC Support | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 128 Lanes | Gen 3, 44 Lanes |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Launch MSRP | $650 | $1979 |