AMD EPYC 7443P vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and the AMD EPYC 7443P are both 24-core processors, but they are engineered for entirely different worlds. The Intel part is a desktop flagship with a 125 W TDP, while the AMD chip is a server workhorse with a 200 W TDP. The benchmark data reveals a fascinating split: Intel dominates in raw compute and single-threaded tasks, while AMD counters with significant wins in memory-heavy and integer workloads. The overall win count is 12 for Intel and 5 for AMD, but the margins in AMD's victories are often stark.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic disparity appears in floating-point math. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus scores 214,760 in the Passmark floating-point test, which is a 65.3% advantage over the EPYC 7443P's 129,932. This is the largest percentage gap in the entire comparison, suggesting a fundamental difference in execution resources for this workload. Similarly, in single-threaded performance, Intel holds a 65.9% lead, scoring 4,823 versus AMD's 2,907. This is consistent across all Cinebench iterations, where Intel wins every single-core test by a uniform 6.8% margin.

In multi-threaded Cinebench workloads, Intel maintains a consistent edge. The R23 multi-core score is 51,731 versus 48,433, another 6.8% delta. This pattern repeats in R15 (5,214 vs 4,881) and R20 (21,727 vs 20,341). The Passmark multithread test shows a similar 6.8% lead for Intel at 60,860 versus 56,981. Interestingly, despite the EPYC having 48 threads to Intel's 24, the Intel processor still manages to outperform in these heavily threaded tests. The data suggests Intel's per-core efficiency and higher clock speeds overcome the EPYC's thread count advantage.

Intel also wins in extended instructions (8.6% ahead with 52,338 vs 48,213) and prime number finding (22.7% ahead with 503 vs 410). The prime number test, in particular, shows a massive per-core advantage for Intel, which is likely tied to its superior single-core performance. These wins paint a picture of a processor that is simply faster at executing instructions, regardless of the workload type.

However, AMD's victories are not marginal. The EPYC 7443P crushes Intel in Passmark integer math, scoring 232,632 against 166,194 — a 28.6% lead for AMD. This is a massive reversal. The EPYC also wins in data compression by 14.9% (820,859 vs 698,346) and random string sorting by 16.6% (95,581 vs 79,744). Its data encryption score of 57,263 is 8.2% higher than Intel's 52,563. The most intriguing AMD win is in Passmark physics, where it scores 4,748 versus Intel's 3,315 — a 30.2% advantage. This is counterintuitive, as physics simulations often favor high clock speeds, but the EPYC's architecture clearly handles this specific workload more efficiently.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two is vast. Intel's Arrow Lake Refresh is built on a 3 nm TSMC process with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. AMD's Milan, based on Zen 3, uses a 7 nm process with 16,600 million transistors spread across four 81 mm² dies. This fundamental difference explains the clock speed gap: Intel boosts to 5.80 GHz while AMD tops out at 4.00 GHz. The base clocks tell a similar story: 3.70 GHz for Intel versus 2.85 GHz for AMD.

Cache configurations reveal strategic divergence. Intel allocates 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 per core, with 36 MB of shared L3. AMD offers a smaller per-core L1 (64 KB) and L2 (512 KB), but a massive 128 MB of shared L3. This larger L3 pool is likely a major contributor to AMD's wins in data compression and random string sorting, where larger working sets can be cached locally. The EPYC's eight-channel DDR4 memory bus provides 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth, compared to Intel's dual-channel DDR5 at 115.2 GB/s. This near-2x bandwidth advantage is another critical factor in AMD's memory-intensive victories.

The processors also differ in connectivity and features. Intel provides Gen 5 PCIe with 20 lanes, while AMD offers Gen 4 with a staggering 128 lanes. Intel includes integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units; AMD has none. Both support ECC memory, but Intel's is a desktop part with an unlocked multiplier, suggesting overclocking intent, while AMD's is locked and explicitly for server/workstation use. The EPYC's release date is March 2021, making it a mature platform, while Intel's is current generation. Intel's TDP is 125 W versus AMD's 200 W, meaning the EPYC draws significantly more power.

Where Each One Wins

For workloads that depend on high clock speeds and low latency, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is the clear choice. Its 65.9% lead in single-threaded Passmark and consistent 6.8% wins across all Cinebench tests make it superior for tasks like general desktop responsiveness, gaming, and lightly threaded applications. The extended instructions score suggests it handles AVX and similar workloads better. If a task is bottlenecked by a single core or requires rapid instruction execution, Intel wins decisively. The floating-point math result (65.3% lead) is particularly relevant for scientific computing and 3D rendering, where FPU performance is paramount.

The AMD EPYC 7443P is optimized for throughput in specific server scenarios. Its 28.6% lead in integer math is crucial for database operations, financial modeling, and encryption tasks. The data compression win (14.9%) makes it better suited for file servers, backup systems, and data archiving. The random string sorting victory (16.6%) is relevant for data processing pipelines and search indexing. Its 30.2% win in physics is anomalous but suggests certain simulation engines will run faster. The massive 128 MB L3 cache and 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth make it superior for workloads that repeatedly access large datasets, such as virtualization hosts and in-memory databases.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is the faster processor for the vast majority of compute tasks. It wins 12 out of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, including all Cinebench tests and the Passmark multithread test. Its per-core performance is in a different league, evidenced by the 65.9% single-thread lead. For any user whose primary concern is raw speed — whether single-threaded or multi-threaded — the Intel part is the correct choice. The 6.8% uniform Cinebench delta suggests Intel has a consistent architectural advantage that scales across all core counts.

The AMD EPYC 7443P should be selected only for specific server workloads where its unique strengths align. If integer math, data compression, or memory bandwidth are the primary bottlenecks, the EPYC's 28.6% integer lead and 14.9% compression win are compelling. Its 128 MB L3 cache and eight-channel memory architecture are designed for these exact scenarios. The EPYC also offers 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes versus Intel's 20 Gen 5 lanes, making it the choice for systems requiring massive I/O expansion. However, its lower clock speeds and older process node mean it loses every single-threaded benchmark and all Cinebench tests. The verdict is clear: choose Intel for speed, AMD for specialized server throughput.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus wins every single-core test. Its Passmark single-thread score of 4,823 is 65.9% higher than the EPYC's 2,907. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 7,303 versus 6,837, a 6.8% lead.

Q: Does the AMD EPYC's 48 threads beat Intel's 24 threads in multi-threaded tests?

A: No. Despite having double the threads, the EPYC loses the Passmark multithread test (56,981 vs 60,860) and all Cinebench multi-core tests. Intel wins R23 multi-core with 51,731 versus 48,433, a 6.8% margin.

Q: In which workloads does the AMD EPYC 7443P have a significant advantage?

A: The EPYC leads by 28.6% in Passmark integer math (232,632 vs 166,194), 14.9% in data compression (820,859 vs 698,346), and 16.6% in random string sorting (95,581 vs 79,744). It also wins physics by 30.2% and encryption by 8.2%.

Q: How do the memory systems compare between the two?

A: The EPYC uses eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel uses dual-channel DDR5 with 115.2 GB/s. The EPYC also has 128 MB of shared L3 cache versus Intel's 36 MB.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Both support ECC memory. The EPYC is designed for server reliability, while the Intel desktop part also includes ECC support.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: Intel is built on TSMC's 3 nm process, while AMD uses TSMC's 7 nm process. This gives Intel a significant advantage in clock speeds, with a 5.80 GHz boost versus AMD's 4.00 GHz.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus | AMD EPYC 7443P |

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

| Threads | 24 | 48 |

| Base Clock | 3.70 GHz | 2.85 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.80 GHz | 4.00 GHz |

| TDP | 125 W | 200 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1851 | AMD Socket SP3 |

| Architecture | Arrow Lake Refresh | Zen 3 (Milan) |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 17,800 million | 16,600 million |

| Die Size | 243 mm² | 4x 81 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 192 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 3 MB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 36 MB (shared) | 128 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Eight-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 115.2 GB/s | 204.8 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 20 Lanes | Gen 4, 128 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU | None |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | Not listed | 2021-03-14 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $1337 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |