AMD EPYC 7401P vs Intel Core i9-10900X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a sharply split picture between the AMD EPYC 7401P and the Intel Core i9-10900X. Across the Cinebench suite, the EPYC 7401P dominates every single test, while the Core i9-10900X sweeps the Geekbench tests. This is not a close contest; the deltas are consistent and large in each direction.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 7401P scores 2384 against 1910 for the i9-10900X, a 24.8% advantage. The single-core R15 result follows the same pattern: 336 versus 269, a 24.9% lead for the EPYC. Moving to Cinebench R20, the EPYC 7401P posts 9937 multi-core and 1402 single-core, while the i9-10900X manages 7961 and 1123 respectively. Both deltas sit at exactly 24.8%. Cinebench R23 continues the trend: 23660 multi-core versus 18957, and 3340 single-core versus 2676, again with a 24.8% gap in both disciplines. The EPYC 7401P wins all six Cinebench comparisons, and the margins are almost identical across every metric.

The story flips completely in Geekbench. The i9-10900X scores 10104 multi-core against 4666 for the EPYC 7401P, a 53.8% lead. In single-core, the i9-10900X posts 1438 versus 787, a 45.3% advantage. These are the largest deltas in the entire head-to-head set, and they show that the Intel part is far ahead in workloads that favor lower core counts and higher per-thread performance.

The overall win count stands at 6 for the AMD EPYC 7401P and 2 for the Intel Core i9-10900X. Yet the average benchmark scores tell a slightly different story: the EPYC 7401P has an average benchmark score of 5814, while the i9-10900X sits at 5555. That puts the EPYC 7401P roughly 4.7% ahead on average, though both chips share the same 61st percentile among all CPUs in the database. The nearest rivals for the EPYC 7401P include the Intel Xeon E-2388G (0.2% higher), the Intel Xeon W-2175 (0.8% higher), and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X (1.5% higher), while the AMD EPYC 7451 is 1.7% faster. The i9-10900X, by contrast, sits within 0.9% of the Intel Core i7-12700T and within 0.8% of the Intel Atom x7433RE, which shows how tightly clustered its average score is.

Architecture Differences

The two processors belong to very different architectural lineages. The AMD EPYC 7401P is built on the Zen architecture, specifically the Naples codename, and uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. It packs 24 cores and 48 threads, with a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 3.0 GHz. The i9-10900X uses Intel's Cascade Lake architecture (Cascade Lake-X codename), also on a 14 nm node but from Intel's own foundry. It has 10 cores and 20 threads, with a base clock of 3.7 GHz and a boost clock of 4.7 GHz.

The transistor counts and die sizes differ dramatically, although the database does not list figures for the Intel part. The EPYC 7401P contains 4,800 million transistors on a 213 mm² die. Cache layouts are also distinct: the EPYC 7401P uses 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 64 MB L3 cache. The i9-10900X has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a much smaller 19.25 MB shared L3 cache. The L3 difference alone explains part of the EPYC's multi-threaded edge, as it can hold far more working set data on-die.

Memory support also diverges. The EPYC 7401P runs DDR4 over an eight-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 170.6 GB/s. The i9-10900X also supports DDR4 but only over a quad-channel bus, with no bandwidth figure recorded in the database. The EPYC 7401P includes ECC memory support; the i9-10900X does not. Both use PCIe Gen 3, and neither has integrated graphics.

The market segments are explicit: the EPYC 7401P is a Server/Workstation part, while the i9-10900X is a Desktop part. The EPYC 7401P ships on AMD Socket SP3, the i9-10900X on Intel Socket 2066. Both have unlocked multipliers, so overclocking is possible on either platform, though the server-oriented EPYC would be an unusual choice for that purpose.

Release timing also differs. The EPYC 7401P launched on 2017-06-28, while the i9-10900X arrived on 2019-10-18, more than two years later. Despite that gap, the EPYC's Zen architecture still holds a decisive lead in Cinebench, which suggests that core count and cache capacity matter more than the newer process or higher clocks on the Intel side.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench multi-core tests?

A: The AMD EPYC 7401P wins every Cinebench multi-core test. It leads by 24.8% in R15 (2384 vs 1910), R20 (9937 vs 7961), and R23 (23660 vs 18957).

Q: Why does the Intel Core i9-10900X win in Geekbench?

A: The i9-10900X scores 10104 in Geekbench multi-core against 4666 for the EPYC 7401P, a 53.8% advantage. In single-core, it leads 1438 to 787, a 45.3% gap. The higher per-core clocks (4.7 GHz boost vs 3.0 GHz) and the desktop-oriented architecture favor these workloads.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The EPYC 7401P has 24 cores and 48 threads. The i9-10900X has 10 cores and 20 threads. The EPYC provides 14 more cores and 28 more threads.

Q: Is there a difference in memory bandwidth?

A: Yes. The EPYC 7401P uses an eight-channel memory bus with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth. The i9-10900X uses a quad-channel bus, and the database records no bandwidth figure for it.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD EPYC 7401P supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i9-10900X does not.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores?

A: The EPYC 7401P has an average benchmark score of 5814, while the i9-10900X has 5555. Both sit at the 61st percentile among all CPUs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 7401P | Intel Core i9-10900X |

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

| Cores | 24 | 10 |

| Threads | 48 | 20 |

| Base Clock | 2000 MHz | 3.7 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.0 GHz | 4.7 GHz |

| TDP | 170 W | 165 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | Intel Socket 2066 |

| Architecture | Zen (Naples) | Cascade Lake (Cascade Lake-X) |

| Process Node | 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) | 14 nm (Intel) |

| Transistors | 4,800 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 213 mm² | Not recorded |

| L1 Cache | 96 KB per core | 64 KB per core |

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

| L3 Cache | 64 MB shared | 19.25 MB shared |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 170.6 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2017-06-28 | 2019-10-18 |

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct buyers. The AMD EPYC 7401P is the clear choice for anyone running Cinebench-style multi-threaded workloads. Its 24 cores, 48 threads, 64 MB L3 cache, and eight-channel memory bus deliver a consistent 24.8% advantage over the i9-10900X across every Cinebench version. The EPYC also carries ECC memory support and a server-grade socket, which matters for workstation reliability.

The Intel Core i9-10900X wins where single-threaded performance and Geekbench-style tasks dominate. Its 4.7 GHz boost clock and 10 faster cores deliver a 45.3% single-core and 53.8% multi-core lead over the EPYC in Geekbench. For desktop users who need high per-core speed, the i9-10900X is the better fit.

The average benchmark scores favor the EPYC 7401P, 5814 versus 5555, but the 61st percentile ranking is identical for both. Neither part can be called a universal winner. The EPYC 7401P is for throughput, the i9-10900X is for responsiveness. The database suggests picking based on the workload, not the brand.