AMD EPYC 73F3 vs Intel Core i7-4790K Comparison

The Intel Core i7-4790K and the AMD EPYC 73F3 represent two entirely different eras and purposes of processor design. The data shows a complete sweep in the head-to-head benchmarks, with the EPYC 73F3 winning all six recorded tests. The i7-4790K, a 2014 desktop part, is a legacy quad-core chip, while the EPYC 73F3 is a 2021 server processor with 16 physical cores. Their benchmark scores, however, tell a story that goes beyond simple core counts, reflecting massive differences in architecture, memory bandwidth, and intended workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the AMD EPYC 73F3 is the clear winner in every single recorded metric. In the six head-to-head comparisons, the EPYC 73F3 wins all of them, with a consistent deltaPct of approximately -82.5% against the i7-4790K. This means the Intel chip scores about 82.5% lower than the AMD part in each test. For example, in Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 73F3 scores 39,187 points compared to the i7-4790K's 6,855 points. The single-core results are equally lopsided, with the EPYC 73F3 achieving 5,532 points in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 967 points for the i7-4790K.

There is no benchmark category where the Intel Core i7-4790K manages to outperform the AMD EPYC 73F3. The data shows zero wins for the i7-4790K across all tested workloads. This includes both multi-threaded and single-threaded scenarios. The EPYC 73F3's advantage is not marginal; it is a dominant performance gap. In terms of overall average benchmark score, the i7-4790K sits at 11,745, while the EPYC 73F3 has an average score of 11,334, which is surprising given the head-to-head results, but this average is skewed by the fact that the EPYC 73F3's benchmark list is shorter and does not include the PassMark tests where the i7-4790K has specific data points.

The i7-4790K's only potential "win" is in the context of its nearest rivals, not against the EPYC 73F3. It sits in the 67th percentile of all CPUs, with a nearest rival being the Intel Core i7-1185G7, which it edges out by a 0.4% deltaPct. This suggests that while the i7-4790K is old, it remains competitive with much newer low-power parts, but it is entirely outclassed by the server-grade EPYC chip.

The Verdict

The verdict is straightforward: the AMD EPYC 73F3 is the superior processor in every measurable way according to the data. Anyone requiring high throughput in multi-threaded applications—such as server virtualization, scientific computing, or heavy content creation—should choose the EPYC 73F3. Its 16 cores and 32 threads, combined with a 256 MB shared L3 cache and 204.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth, make it a powerhouse for parallel workloads. The data shows it is roughly 5.7 times faster than the i7-4790K in Cinebench R23 multi-core, a staggering margin.

The Intel Core i7-4790K, by contrast, is an end-of-life desktop part. Its only advantages are qualitative, such as having integrated graphics (Intel HD 4600) and a much lower launch MSRP of $350 compared to the EPYC 73F3's $3,521. However, the rules of this analysis preclude discussing price-to-performance. From a pure performance standpoint, the i7-4790K should only be considered if the workload is extremely light and the user is locked into the Intel Socket 1150 platform. Its single-thread score of 967 in Cinebench R23 is less than 20% of the EPYC's 5,532, indicating that even in lightly-threaded tasks, the newer architecture of the EPYC 73F3 is decisively faster.

For a buyer, the choice is clear: the EPYC 73F3 is for servers and workstations, while the i7-4790K is a historical artifact. The data does not support any scenario where the i7-4790K is the recommended choice over the EPYC 73F3, outside of legacy platform compatibility or a non-performance-driven use case.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table shows a consistent pattern of dominance by the AMD EPYC 73F3. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 73F3 scores 3,949 versus the i7-4790K's 690, a deltaPct of -82.5%. The single-core test in the same suite shows a similar story: 557 for the EPYC 73F3 and 97 for the i7-4790K, a deltaPct of -82.6%. This near-identical percentage gap across both single and multi-core tests is notable; it suggests that the EPYC 73F3 is not just scaling better with more cores, but its individual cores are also significantly more efficient.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the gap widens in absolute terms. The EPYC 73F3 achieves 16,458 multi-core points, while the i7-4790K manages only 2,879. The single-core scores are 2,323 versus 406. Again, the deltaPct remains at -82.5%. The same pattern repeats in Cinebench R23, with the EPYC 73F3 scoring 39,187 multi-core and 5,532 single-core, compared to 6,855 and 967 for the i7-4790K. The consistency of the ~82.5% deficit across all Cinebench versions indicates that the performance gap is structural and not workload-specific.

The largest absolute gap is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the EPYC 73F3 leads by 32,332 points. The smallest absolute gap is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the lead is 460 points. In every case, the EPYC 73F3's advantage is overwhelming. The i7-4790K's best score in any test is its Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 6,855, which is still less than half of the EPYC 73F3's single-core score of 5,532. This stark comparison highlights the generational leap in performance between a 22 nm Haswell desktop chip and a 7 nm Zen 3 server chip.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 73F3 has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core i7-4790K has 4 cores and 8 threads. This 4x difference in core count is a primary driver of the multi-core benchmark results.

Q: Is the Intel Core i7-4790K faster in any benchmark?

A: No. According to the head-to-head data, the AMD EPYC 73F3 wins all six recorded benchmarks. The winsA field shows 0 wins for the i7-4790K and 6 wins for the EPYC 73F3.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD EPYC 73F3 supports eight-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, whereas the Intel Core i7-4790K supports dual-channel DDR3 with a bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s. This 8x difference in memory bandwidth is significant for memory-intensive server workloads.

Q: Do these processors have integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i7-4790K features Intel HD 4600 integrated graphics. The AMD EPYC 73F3 has no integrated graphics at all.

Q: What are the process nodes and foundries?

A: The Intel Core i7-4790K is built on a 22 nm process by Intel, while the AMD EPYC 73F3 is built on a 7 nm process by TSMC. The EPYC 73F3 also has a much larger transistor count at 33,200 million versus 1,400 million.

Q: What is the market segment for each?

A: The Intel Core i7-4790K is a desktop processor, while the AMD EPYC 73F3 is a server/workstation processor. The production status is end-of-life for the i7-4790K and active for the EPYC 73F3.

Architecture Differences

The architectural differences between these two CPUs are vast and explain the benchmark results. The Intel Core i7-4790K uses the Haswell architecture, built on a 22 nm process at Intel's foundry. It has 1,400 million transistors on a die size of 177 mm². Its cache layout includes 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, plus an 8 MB shared L3 cache. It supports dual-channel DDR3 memory with a bus speed that yields 25.6 GB/s of bandwidth. It connects via PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The chip has an unlocked multiplier, a base clock of 4.00 GHz, and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, with a TDP of 88 W.

In contrast, the AMD EPYC 73F3 uses the Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Milan, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 33,200 million transistors across a complex of eight chiplets, each with a die size of 81 mm². Its cache is significantly larger: 64 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, but the standout feature is a 256 MB shared L3 cache. This massive L3 cache is a key advantage for server workloads. Memory support is eight-channel DDR4, providing 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth. PCIe support is Gen 4 with 128 lanes from the CPU, offering far more I/O capability. The base clock is 3.50 GHz with a boost of 4.00 GHz, but it draws a TDP of 240 W. It supports ECC memory, which is crucial for server reliability, and does not have an unlocked multiplier.

The process node difference alone (22 nm vs 7 nm) explains a large portion of the performance gap, as the newer node allows for higher transistor density and better power efficiency per clock. The EPYC 73F3's 16 cores are natively supported by a design that prioritizes throughput, whereas the i7-4790K's 4 cores are a product of its 2014-era desktop design. The memory bandwidth difference (8x) and PCIe lane count (8x) further cement the EPYC 73F3's position as a server part, designed to feed many cores and high-speed peripherals simultaneously. The i7-4790K's integrated graphics and lower TDP make it suitable for a legacy desktop, but architecturally, it is a relic compared to the modern, high-core-count EPYC 73F3.