AMD EPYC 7401P vs Intel Core i9-11900KB Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD EPYC 7401P is the outright winner in every recorded benchmark against the Intel Core i9-11900KB. The head-to-head data shows six wins for the EPYC part, with zero for the Intel chip. If your workload is built around multi-threaded rendering or heavily parallel compute, the EPYC 7401P is the clear choice. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 23660 versus 19316, a 22.5% advantage. Its 24 cores and 48 threads simply outmuscle the 8-core, 16-thread Intel part.

However, the Intel Core i9-11900KB has its own reason to exist. It is a mobile-segment chip with integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 750), a 65W TDP, and support for PCIe Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes. The EPYC 7401P is a server/workstation part with no integrated graphics, a 170W TDP, and PCIe Gen 3. If you need a compact, power-conscious system with built-in display output and newer PCIe connectivity, the Intel chip is the practical pick despite losing every benchmark.

The database shows both processors sit at the 61st percentile among all CPUs. Their average benchmark scores differ by only 4% (5814 for AMD, 5587 for Intel). That means the EPYC 7401P is not a dominant performer in absolute terms; it is simply stronger in these specific Cinebench tests. For a builder who values raw thread count and server-grade memory bandwidth (170.6 GB/s versus 51.2 GB/s), the EPYC 7401P wins. For a builder who values low power, integrated graphics, and a modern PCIe interface, the i9-11900KB is the more versatile platform.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU wins in every benchmark listed?

A: The AMD EPYC 7401P wins all six head-to-head tests, including Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core modes. The Intel Core i9-11900KB has zero wins in the recorded data.

Q: How big is the performance gap in multi-core workloads?

A: The EPYC 7401P leads by 22.5% in Cinebench R23 multi-core (23660 versus 19316). The same 22.5% delta appears in R15 multi-core (2384 versus 1946) and R20 multi-core (9937 versus 8112).

Q: Does the Intel chip have any advantages in specifications?

A: Yes. The i9-11900KB has a higher boost clock (5.30 GHz versus 3.00 GHz), a lower TDP (65W versus 170W), integrated UHD Graphics 750, PCIe Gen 4 support, and a newer 10 nm process node. The EPYC 7401P uses a 14 nm node and PCIe Gen 3.

Q: Is the EPYC 7401P better for single-threaded tasks too?

A: According to the data, yes. The EPYC 7401P wins single-core tests by about 22.4-22.6% in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. For example, R23 single-core scores are 3340 versus 2727.

Q: What about memory support?

A: The EPYC 7401P supports eight-channel DDR4 memory with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory. The Intel chip supports dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support.

Q: Are these CPUs in the same performance class overall?

A: Yes. Both have a 61st percentile ranking among all CPUs. Their average benchmark scores are close: 5814 for the EPYC 7401P and 5587 for the i9-11900KB. The nearest rival to the EPYC is the Intel Xeon E-2388G (0.2% delta), while the Intel i9-11900KB sits near the Intel Atom x7433RE (-0.2% delta).

Architecture Differences

The AMD EPYC 7401P is built on the Zen architecture, codenamed Naples, using a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. It packs 24 cores and 48 threads, with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.00 GHz. The chip is designed for server and workstation platforms, fitting into AMD Socket SP3. Its cache hierarchy includes 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 64 MB L3 cache. The die size is 213 mm², and the transistor count is 4,800 million.

The Intel Core i9-11900KB uses the Tiger Lake architecture, specifically Tiger Lake-H, on Intel's 10 nm process. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The chip is a mobile-segment part, soldered to Intel BGA 1787. Its cache configuration is different: 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The die size is 190 mm², and Intel does not list a transistor count in the database.

A key architectural difference is the memory controller. The EPYC 7401P supports eight-channel DDR4 memory, delivering 170.6 GB/s of bandwidth, and includes ECC memory support. The i9-11900KB supports dual-channel DDR4, with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, and lacks ECC support. The EPYC also uses PCIe Gen 3, while the Intel chip supports PCIe Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes. The Intel part includes integrated UHD Graphics 750, whereas the EPYC has no integrated graphics. The EPYC is still in active production, while the Intel part is marked end-of-life.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The EPYC 7401P has 24 cores and 48 threads; the i9-11900KB has 8 cores and 16 threads. The EPYC's base clock is 2.00 GHz, and its boost clock is 3.00 GHz. The Intel chip runs at 3.30 GHz base and 5.30 GHz boost. TDP is a major split: 170W for the EPYC versus 65W for the Intel part.

Socket and platform are also different. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3, while the Intel chip uses Intel BGA 1787. The EPYC is a server/workstation part; the i9-11900KB is a mobile part. Process node: 14 nm for AMD, 10 nm for Intel. Foundry: GlobalFoundries for AMD, Intel for its own chip.

Cache sizes differ substantially. The EPYC has 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 64 MB shared L3. The Intel chip has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3. The EPYC's total L3 is larger, but the Intel part has more L2 per core.

Memory support: both use DDR4, but the EPYC runs eight-channel with 170.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC. The Intel chip runs dual-channel with 51.2 GB/s and no ECC. PCIe generation: EPYC is Gen 3, Intel is Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes. The Intel chip has integrated UHD Graphics 750; the EPYC has none. The EPYC is active in production, while the Intel part is end-of-life. The Intel chip has a launch MSRP of $539. The EPYC has no recorded launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data is remarkably consistent. Across all six Cinebench tests, the AMD EPYC 7401P wins by roughly 22.5%. The deltas range from 22.4% to 22.6%. This uniformity suggests a stable performance advantage tied to the EPYC's larger thread count and memory bandwidth, not a workload-specific quirk.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC scores 2384 versus 1946 for the Intel chip, a 22.5% lead. In R15 single-core, the EPYC scores 336 versus 274, a 22.6% lead. The single-core result is notable because the Intel chip has a much higher boost clock (5.30 GHz versus 3.00 GHz). Yet the EPYC still wins, which indicates the Zen architecture's efficiency in this test outweighs clock speed.

Cinebench R20 follows the same pattern. Multi-core: 9937 versus 8112, a 22.5% delta. Single-core: 1402 versus 1145, a 22.4% delta. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 23660 versus 19316, again 22.5%. R23 single-core: 3340 versus 2727, 22.5%.

The EPYC also appears in the broader database with Geekbench scores: 4666 multi-core and 787 single-core. The Intel chip does not have Geekbench results recorded. The EPYC's average benchmark score is 5814, and its nearest rival is the Intel Xeon E-2388G at 5805 (0.2% delta). The Intel i9-11900KB has an average score of 5587, with its nearest rival being the Intel Atom x7433RE at 5601 (-0.2% delta). These comparisons show that neither chip is an outlier in its performance class; they are both mid-pack parts in the overall CPU landscape.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 7401P wins in every recorded benchmark. That makes it the default choice for any workload measured by Cinebench, including single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering. If you are building a server or workstation that will run batch rendering, simulation, or any heavily threaded task, the EPYC's 24 cores and 48 threads provide a clear 22.5% advantage over the Intel chip in these tests. Its eight-channel memory (170.6 GB/s) and ECC support also make it more suitable for memory-sensitive or reliability-critical workloads.

The Intel Core i9-11900KB wins in scenarios outside the benchmark list. It is a mobile-segment chip with a 65W TDP, which makes it far easier to cool and power in a compact chassis. It has integrated UHD Graphics 750, so a system can be built without a discrete GPU for basic display output. It supports PCIe Gen 4, which offers double the bandwidth of the EPYC's Gen 3 for compatible storage or GPUs. Its boost clock of 5.30 GHz is significantly higher, though the benchmark data shows that does not translate into a Cinebench win.

For a practical builder, the choice comes down to platform priorities. If you need a server-grade CPU with massive memory bandwidth, ECC, and superior Cinebench scores, the EPYC 7401P is the only option in this comparison. If you need a low-power mobile chip with integrated graphics, modern PCIe, and a soldered BGA package, the i9-11900KB fits that role even though it loses every recorded benchmark. The data does not show a scenario where the Intel chip outperforms the EPYC, but its feature set addresses a different set of use cases.