AMD EPYC 7371 vs Intel Core i9-9960X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clear, consistent pattern: the AMD EPYC 7371 wins every recorded Cinebench test against the Intel Core i9-9960X. Out of six head-to-head comparisons, the EPYC 7371 takes all six, with margins ranging from 4.1% to 4.2%. This is not a narrow victory in a single workload; it is a uniform advantage across every rendering benchmark in the database.

Looking at multi-core performance, the EPYC 7371 scores 2637 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, while the i9-9960X scores 2532, a 4.1% lead. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the gap widens slightly to 4.2%, with scores of 10988 versus 10550. The most demanding test, Cinebench R23 multi-core, shows the EPYC 7371 at 26164 against the Intel part's 25120, again a 4.2% advantage. These are modest but real gains, and they repeat across every generation of the Cinebench suite.

Single-core results tell the same story. The EPYC 7371 leads by 4.2% in Cinebench R15 single-core (372 versus 357) and matches that exact 4.2% margin in both R20 (1551 versus 1489) and R23 (3693 versus 3546). The only slight variation is R15 multi-core at 4.1%, but the overall trend is remarkably consistent. For a server-class processor to outpace a desktop HEDT part in single-threaded tests, even by 4%, indicates that the Zen architecture in the EPYC 7371 holds up well against Intel's Skylake-X design at similar clock speeds.

The Intel i9-9960X does have one additional benchmark in the database that the EPYC 7371 lacks: Geekbench. The i9-9960X scores 10512 in Geekbench multi-core and 1396 in single-core. Since the EPYC 7371 has no corresponding Geekbench entry, a direct comparison there is not possible from the recorded data. However, the six Cinebench tests that do overlap all favor AMD.

In terms of overall average benchmark score, the EPYC 7371 sits at 7568, while the i9-9960X averages 6938. This difference of roughly 630 points reflects the EPYC's consistent wins. When placed against its nearest rivals, the EPYC 7371 is essentially tied with the Intel Core i5-6500 (7569, 0% delta) and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX (7578, -0.1% delta). The Intel Core i9-9960X, by contrast, sits near the AMD Ryzen 3 3200G (6931, 0.1% delta) and the Intel Pentium Gold G6400 (6969, -0.4% delta). This is not to say these chips are comparable in real workloads, but the database's percentile ranking places both the EPYC 7371 and the i9-9960X at the 63rd percentile among all CPUs. Their average scores, however, tell a different story: the EPYC 7371 is roughly 9% higher in aggregate.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD EPYC 7371 is built on the Zen architecture, codenamed Naples, and belongs to the EPYC 7001 series. It uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, with 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. The Intel Core i9-9960X, on the other hand, uses the Skylake architecture, specifically Skylake-X, and is part of the Core i9 X-Series 9th Gen family. Intel also uses a 14 nm process, but the die is much larger at 484 mm², and the transistor count is not recorded in the database.

Cache layouts differ substantially. The EPYC 7371 has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a large 64 MB shared L3 cache. The i9-9960X has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and only 22 MB of shared L3. The EPYC's L3 cache is nearly three times larger, which can benefit workloads with larger working sets. The L2 advantage goes the other way: Intel's 1 MB per core doubles AMD's 512 KB per core.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The EPYC 7371 supports eight-channel DDR4 memory with a peak bandwidth of 170.6 GB/s. The i9-9960X uses quad-channel DDR4, delivering 85.3 GB/s, exactly half the bandwidth. The EPYC also supports ECC memory, while the i9 does not. For memory-heavy tasks, this is a substantial difference. The EPYC's platform is designed for server workloads, which is reflected in its socket: AMD Socket SP3. The Intel part uses Socket 2066, a desktop HEDT platform.

PCIe support also differs. The EPYC 7371 provides PCIe Gen 3, while the i9-9960X offers PCIe Gen 3 with 44 lanes (CPU only). The exact lane count for the EPYC is not specified in the database, but the server positioning implies a different expansion philosophy. Both processors have unlocked multipliers, so overclocking is possible on either, though the EPYC's server platform may limit practical overclocking compared to Intel's desktop-oriented X299 platform.

The release dates are close: the i9-9960X launched on 2018-10-18, and the EPYC 7371 on 2018-11-15, roughly a month later. The EPYC 7371 remains in active production, while the i9-9960X is marked as end-of-life.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better multi-core performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 7371 wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests. It leads by 4.1% in R15 (2637 versus 2532), 4.2% in R20 (10988 versus 10550), and 4.2% in R23 (26164 versus 25120).

Q: Is the Intel Core i9-9960X better in single-core tests?

A: No. The database shows the EPYC 7371 winning every single-core test by 4.1% to 4.2%. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the EPYC scores 3693 versus the i9's 3546.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: The EPYC 7371 supports eight-channel DDR4 with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth. The i9-9960X supports quad-channel DDR4 with 85.3 GB/s, which is exactly half.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The EPYC 7371 supports ECC memory, while the i9-9960X does not.

Q: What are the cache sizes?

A: The EPYC 7371 has 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 64 MB shared L3. The i9-9960X has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 22 MB shared L3.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i9-9960X boosts to 4.50 GHz, while the EPYC 7371 boosts to 3.80 GHz. Both have a 3.10 GHz base clock.

Specification Differences

The two chips share the same core and thread counts: 16 cores and 32 threads each. Both run at a 3.10 GHz base clock. From there, the specifications diverge.

The Intel i9-9960X has a higher boost clock at 4.50 GHz versus the EPYC's 3.80 GHz. TDP is slightly lower on the Intel part: 165W versus 170W. The sockets are completely different: AMD Socket SP3 for the EPYC, Intel Socket 2066 for the i9. The EPYC uses the Zen architecture with the Naples codename, while the i9 uses Skylake with the Skylake-X codename.

Process node is identical at 14 nm, but the foundry differs: GlobalFoundries for AMD, Intel for Intel. Die size is a major difference: 213 mm² for the EPYC versus 484 mm² for the i9. The EPYC has more transistors at 4,800 million, while the i9's transistor count is not recorded.

Memory support shows the EPYC's server heritage: eight-channel DDR4 with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support. The i9 uses quad-channel DDR4 with 85.3 GB/s and no ECC. PCIe is Gen 3 on both, but the i9 specifies 44 lanes (CPU only), while the EPYC's lane count is not listed. The i9 has an unlocked multiplier, and so does the EPYC.

Market segments differ: the EPYC is a Server/Workstation part, while the i9 is a Desktop part. Production status is Active for the EPYC and End-of-life for the i9. The i9 has a recorded launch MSRP of $1684, while the EPYC has no MSRP listed. The i9 also has two Geekbench scores in the database, while the EPYC does not.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7371 wins every benchmark where both processors have recorded scores. That gives it a clean sweep in Cinebench, both multi-core and single-core, across R15, R20, and R23. The margins are small, around 4%, but they are universal. For rendering workloads that rely on Cinebench-style performance, the EPYC 7371 is the faster chip.

The EPYC also wins on platform features. It has eight-channel memory with double the bandwidth of the i9's quad-channel setup, and it supports ECC memory. For servers, workstations, or any system that needs large memory throughput or error-correcting memory, the EPYC is clearly the more capable part. Its 64 MB L3 cache is also substantially larger than the i9's 22 MB, which can help in cache-sensitive workloads.

The Intel Core i9-9960X has its own advantages, mostly outside the benchmark suite. It has a higher boost clock at 4.50 GHz, which suggests headroom for lightly threaded tasks even though the recorded single-core benchmarks do not show a win. It uses the desktop Socket 2066 platform, which is built for consumer and prosumer systems, and it has 44 PCIe Gen 3 lanes for expansion. The i9 also has a larger L2 cache per core (1 MB versus 512 KB), which can benefit certain latency-sensitive workloads.

The i9's lower TDP of 165W versus 170W is a minor advantage for cooling, but the practical difference is small. The i9 is end-of-life, so availability may be limited compared to the still-active EPYC.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD EPYC 7371 as the better performer in every benchmark the database records. It wins all six Cinebench comparisons, with a consistent 4.1% to 4.2% margin across both single-threaded and multi-threaded tests. Its average benchmark score of 7568 is notably higher than the i9's 6938, and it ties with the EPYC's nearest rivals at the 63rd percentile.

For a system builder choosing between these two, the decision hinges on platform needs. If the workload benefits from eight-channel memory, ECC support, or a larger L3 cache, the EPYC 7371 is the obvious pick. It is also the only one still in active production. The i9-9960X offers a higher boost clock and a desktop socket, but those advantages do not translate into any benchmark wins in the recorded data.

For pure rendering performance, the EPYC 7371 is the winner. For a desktop workstation where the i9's 44 PCIe lanes and higher boost clock matter more than ECC memory or memory bandwidth, the i9 could still be a reasonable choice, especially if the software does not scale with cache size. But based strictly on the benchmarks, the EPYC 7371 takes every category. The i9-9960X has no recorded victories, and that is the simplest way to summarize this comparison.