AMD EPYC 7473X vs Intel Core i5-9600K Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7473X utterly dominates the Intel Core i5-9600K across every benchmark in this comparison, with the data showing a consistent performance gap of roughly 82% in the EPYC’s favor. This is not a close contest; it is a demonstration of how far server-class silicon sits above a six-core desktop part from 2018. The benchmark results reveal a complete sweep for the EPYC 7473X, which wins all six head-to-head tests, leaving the i5-9600K trailing by margins that are practically insurmountable in any multi-threaded or single-threaded workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern in the head-to-head data is the uniformity of the EPYC 7473X’s victory. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC scores 5,078 against the i5-9600K’s 912, a deltaPct of -82%. That margin is mirrored in Cinebench R20 multi-core (21,162 vs. 3,803) and Cinebench R23 multi-core (50,388 vs. 9,055), both showing the same -82% delta. The consistency of these numbers is remarkable; regardless of the Cinebench version, the EPYC 7473X delivers roughly 5.5 times the multi-core performance of the i5-9600K. The single-core results tell a slightly different but equally decisive story. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the EPYC scores 716 versus the i5’s 128, a deltaPct of -82.1%. Similarly, Cinebench R20 single-core (2,987 vs. 536) and R23 single-core (7,113 vs. 1,278) both show deltas of -82.1% and -82%, respectively. The EPYC’s advantage is not merely a matter of core count; its per-core performance is also vastly superior.

The i5-9600K’s best individual results do not appear in the head-to-head table, as it records zero wins. However, its standalone benchmark scores provide context for its overall capability. Its Passmark multi-thread score of 10,636 and Geekbench multi-core score of 6,075 are respectable for a desktop part, but they pale in comparison to the EPYC’s Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 50,388. The EPYC 7473X’s Cinebench R23 single-core score of 7,113 is 5.5 times higher than the i5’s 1,278, which is a decisive indicator that the EPYC’s Zen 3 architecture is far more efficient per clock. The data does not show a single workload where the i5-9600K comes out ahead; the EPYC 7473X is the clear winner in every measured category. The deltas are so large that they suggest the i5-9600K is not just slower but in a completely different performance class.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD EPYC 7473X in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The EPYC 7473X scores 50,388 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Intel Core i5-9600K scores 9,055. This represents a deltaPct of -82%, meaning the EPYC is approximately five times faster in this specific multi-threaded rendering workload.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-9600K win any benchmark in this comparison?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows zero wins for the i5-9600K across all six Cinebench tests. The AMD EPYC 7473X wins all six, with deltas ranging from -82% to -82.1% in the i5’s favor, which actually indicates the EPYC’s dominance.

Q: What is the single-core performance difference?

A: In Cinebench R20 single-core, the EPYC 7473X scores 2,987 against the i5-9600K’s 536, a deltaPct of -82.1%. This shows the EPYC’s per-core advantage is just as pronounced as its multi-core lead.

Q: Are these processors in the same market segment?

A: No. The Intel Core i5-9600K is a Desktop processor, while the AMD EPYC 7473X is a Server/Workstation part. This difference in market segment is reflected in their specifications, with the EPYC supporting eight-channel memory and 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, compared to the i5’s dual-channel DDR4 and 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The i5-9600K has an average benchmark score of 14,605, while the EPYC 7473X has an average score of 14,574. This is a negligible difference of 0.2%, indicating that the average score metric is not representative of the extreme variance in workload-specific performance.

Q: What is the EPYC 7473X’s launch MSRP?

A: The launch MSRP for the AMD EPYC 7473X is $3900. The Intel Core i5-9600K has no launch MSRP listed in the data.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is enormous and explains the benchmark results. The Intel Core i5-9600K is built on the Coffee Lake architecture, using a 14 nm process node manufactured by Intel. It features 6 cores and 6 threads, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 9 MB L3 cache. This is a monolithic design aimed at consumer desktops, with a dual-channel memory bus and support for DDR4 memory.

In contrast, the AMD EPYC 7473X is a server-class chip based on the Zen 3 architecture, specifically the Milan-X codename. It is manufactured on a 7 nm process by TSMC, featuring 24 cores and 48 threads. Its base clock is 2.80 GHz and its boost clock is 3.70 GHz, which are lower than the i5’s clocks, yet its performance is far higher. The EPYC’s cache configuration is vastly different: it has 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 768 MB of shared L3 cache. This enormous L3 cache is likely a key factor in its superior single-core and multi-core performance. The EPYC also has a transistor count of 33,200 million and a die size of 8x 81 mm², reflecting its complexity as a multi-chiplet design.

The EPYC’s memory support is also far more extensive, with an eight-channel memory bus and a memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, compared to the i5’s dual-channel 42.7 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory, which the i5 does not. The EPYC has 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only), while the i5 has 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. The EPYC does not have integrated graphics, while the i5 includes a UHD 630 iGPU. These differences are not minor tweaks; they represent two fundamentally different design philosophies, one for high-core-count servers and the other for mainstream desktop use.

Specification Differences

The specification table highlights the stark contrasts between these two CPUs. The most obvious difference is the core and thread counts: the i5-9600K has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the EPYC 7473X has 24 cores and 48 threads. The EPYC’s base clock is lower at 2.80 GHz versus the i5’s 3.70 GHz, and its boost clock is 3.70 GHz versus 4.60 GHz, yet the EPYC’s higher core count and larger cache more than compensate. The TDP also differs dramatically: the i5 is rated at 95 W, while the EPYC is rated at 240 W, reflecting the EPYC’s higher power draw and performance envelope. The sockets are incompatible: the i5 uses Intel Socket 1151, while the EPYC uses AMD Socket SP3.

Cache sizes are a major point of divergence. The i5 has 256 KB of L2 per core and 9 MB of shared L3, while the EPYC has 512 KB of L2 per core and 768 MB of shared L3. This 768 MB L3 cache is a defining feature of the EPYC and is likely responsible for its exceptional performance in cache-sensitive workloads. Memory support differs as well: the i5 uses dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth, while the EPYC uses eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. The EPYC supports ECC memory, the i5 does not. PCIe support is also different, with the i5 offering Gen 3, 16 lanes and the EPYC offering Gen 4, 128 lanes. The i5 has integrated graphics (UHD 630), while the EPYC has none. Production status differs, with the i5 being end-of-life and the EPYC being active, and their release dates are years apart. The i5 is multiplier unlocked, while the EPYC is locked.

The Verdict

The data is unequivocal: the AMD EPYC 7473X is the superior processor in every measured benchmark. Anyone needing maximum multi-threaded throughput for server or workstation workloads should choose the EPYC 7473X. Its 24 cores and 48 threads, combined with its massive 768 MB L3 cache, deliver Cinebench R23 multi-core scores that are 82% higher than the i5-9600K. The EPYC’s single-core performance also wins by the same margin, making it a better choice even for lightly threaded tasks. The EPYC’s support for ECC memory, eight-channel DDR4, and 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes further cement its position as a professional-grade component. Its launch MSRP is $3900, which is a high cost, but the performance data justifies it for enterprise use cases.

The Intel Core i5-9600K, on the other hand, is an end-of-life desktop part. Its 6 cores and 6 threads are sufficient for basic desktop tasks, and its higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz provides decent single-threaded performance in legacy applications. However, its average benchmark score of 14,605 is nearly identical to the EPYC’s 14,574, which is misleading given the EPYC’s overwhelming wins in the head-to-head tests. The i5 is a capable desktop CPU, but it is not in the same league as the EPYC. For a consumer building a PC for gaming or general productivity, the i5’s lower TDP of 95 W and integrated graphics are practical advantages. But for any workload that scales with cores, cache, or memory bandwidth, the EPYC 7473X is the only rational choice based on the benchmark data. The i5’s zero wins in the head-to-head comparison are a clear signal of its inferiority in this matchup.