AMD EPYC 7F32 vs Intel Core i9-9920X Comparison

The Intel Core i9-9920X and AMD EPYC 7F32 are both 61st-percentile performers, yet they achieve that standing through radically different designs and benchmark results. The data shows a clear and consistent winner in raw compute: the Intel Core i9-9920X wins every single head-to-head benchmark, taking all 6 contests. The EPYC 7F32’s advantage lies entirely outside the Cinebench and Geekbench suite, in platform features like memory bandwidth, PCIe lanes, and ECC support. For pure CPU throughput, the i9-9920X dominates; for server infrastructure, the EPYC 7F32 is the only rational choice.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The i9-9920X sweeps the benchmark table, but the margins are narrow and remarkably consistent. Across all six head-to-head tests, the Intel part wins by either 6.7% or 6.8%. In Cinebench R15, the i9-9920X scores 2121 multi-core and 299 single-core, while the EPYC 7F32 posts 1987 and 280, respectively. That translates to a 6.7% multi-core advantage and a 6.8% single-core edge for Intel. The pattern repeats in Cinebench R20: 8839 versus 8281 multi-core (6.7% delta) and 1247 versus 1168 single-core (6.8% delta). The story is identical in Cinebench R23, with the i9-9920X hitting 21046 multi-core and 2971 single-core against the EPYC’s 19718 and 2783.

The consistency of these deltas is notable. A 6.7% or 6.8% gap across every Cinebench version suggests a fundamental per-core performance differential, not a workload-specific quirk. In Geekbench, the i9-9920X posts 9422 multi-core and 1393 single-core; the EPYC 7F32 has no Geekbench scores listed in the data, so it cannot be compared there. The average benchmark score tells a similar tale: the i9-9920X averages 5917, while the EPYC 7F32 averages 5703, a difference of roughly 3.8%.

The nearest-rival data reinforces the i9-9920X’s standing. Its average score of 5917 sits just 1.1% below the Intel Xeon W-2170B (5985) and 1.8% above the AMD EPYC 7401P (5814). The EPYC 7F32, with its 5703 average, is nearly tied with the AMD EPYC 7351 (5710, -0.1%) and 0.5% above the Intel Core i9-7920X (5673). In other words, the EPYC 7F32 lands in the same performance tier as older, lower-core-count parts, while the i9-9920X punches slightly above its weight class relative to its immediate neighbors.

Where Each One Wins

The i9-9920X wins everywhere that CPU compute is the sole metric. It leads in all three Cinebench versions, both multi-core and single-core, and also holds the Geekbench scores. The 6.8% single-core advantage is particularly telling for workloads that depend on lightly threaded performance, such as legacy applications, certain simulation solvers, and general desktop responsiveness. The 6.7% multi-core edge extends to rendering, video encoding, and any parallel workload that scales across the 12 cores and 24 threads.

The EPYC 7F32’s wins are not in the benchmark ledger but in the platform specification. It supports eight-channel memory with 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth, versus the i9-9920X’s quad-channel 85.3 GB/s. That is a 2.4x memory bandwidth advantage, which in memory-bound server workloads — database analytics, in-memory caching, large-scale virtualization — can dwarf a 6.7% CPU core delta. The EPYC 7F32 also offers 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes versus the i9-9920X’s 44 Gen 3 lanes. For NVMe storage arrays, GPU compute clusters, or high-speed networking, that lane count and generation difference is decisive. ECC memory support is another differentiator: the EPYC 7F32 supports it, the i9-9920X does not.

So the split is clean. The i9-9920X wins on raw compute in every measured benchmark. The EPYC 7F32 wins on memory bandwidth, PCIe expandability, and error-correcting memory — features that are absent from the benchmark suite but essential for server reliability and I/O throughput.

Architecture Differences

These two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i9-9920X is built on the Skylake-X architecture, a 14 nm design from Intel with a die size of 484 mm². It packs 12 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The cache hierarchy is generous per core: 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, with a shared 19.25 MB L3. It runs on Intel Socket 2066 and uses a quad-channel DDR4 memory bus.

The AMD EPYC 7F32 is a Zen 2 design, codenamed Rome, built on TSMC’s 7 nm process. It uses a chiplet layout with four dies, each 74 mm², totaling 15,200 million transistors. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. The L1 cache is the same 64 KB per core, but L2 drops to 512 KB per core, while L3 is 32 MB per die, totaling 128 MB across the package. It uses AMD Socket SP3 and an eight-channel DDR4 memory bus.

The architectural contrast is stark. The Intel part is a monolithic 14 nm die with higher clocks (4.50 GHz boost versus 3.90 GHz) and more cores (12 versus 8). The AMD part is a 7 nm chiplet design with a massive 128 MB L3 cache and far more memory bandwidth. The TDP reflects the server positioning: the EPYC 7F32 is rated at 180 W, while the i9-9920X is 165 W. The i9-9920X has an unlocked multiplier; the EPYC 7F32 does not. The Intel part is end-of-life, released on 2018-10-18, while the EPYC 7F32 is active, released on 2020-04-13.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous about compute performance: the Intel Core i9-9920X is the faster CPU in every benchmark recorded. It wins multi-core and single-core in all three Cinebench versions, with margins of 6.7% to 6.8%. Anyone selecting a processor for rendering, encoding, or general high-thread-count compute should choose the i9-9920X, provided the platform’s 44 PCIe Gen 3 lanes and quad-channel memory are sufficient.

The AMD EPYC 7F32 is the correct choice for server and workstation deployments where raw CPU speed is secondary to memory and I/O. Its 204.8 GB/s of eight-channel memory bandwidth is 2.4x the i9-9920X’s 85.3 GB/s. Its 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes are nearly three times the lane count and a full generation newer. ECC memory support is non-negotiable for many server environments, and the EPYC 7F32 has it while the i9-9920X does not. The 8-core, 16-thread configuration with a 3.90 GHz boost clock is sufficient for many server workloads, and the 128 MB L3 cache can absorb data locality patterns that would thrash a smaller cache.

The verdict from the data: for compute-bound tasks, the i9-9920X wins outright. For memory-bound, I/O-heavy, or reliability-critical server workloads, the EPYC 7F32’s platform features outweigh its 6.7% CPU deficit.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multi-core Cinebench R23 score?

A: The Intel Core i9-9920X scores 21046, which is 6.7% higher than the AMD EPYC 7F32’s 19718.

Q: Does the AMD EPYC 7F32 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the EPYC 7F32 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i9-9920X does not support ECC memory.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each processor provide?

A: The AMD EPYC 7F32 provides 204.8 GB/s via an eight-channel DDR4 bus. The Intel Core i9-9920X provides 85.3 GB/s via a quad-channel DDR4 bus.

Q: What are the single-core Cinebench R20 scores?

A: The Intel Core i9-9920X scores 1247, while the AMD EPYC 7F32 scores 1168, a 6.8% difference in favor of Intel.

Q: How many PCIe lanes does each CPU offer?

A: The AMD EPYC 7F32 offers 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only). The Intel Core i9-9920X offers 44 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only).

Q: Which processor has a higher base clock?

A: The AMD EPYC 7F32 has a base clock of 3.70 GHz, which is higher than the Intel Core i9-9920X’s 3.50 GHz base clock. However, the Intel part boosts to 4.50 GHz versus the EPYC’s 3.90 GHz.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i9-9920X | AMD EPYC 7F32 |

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

| Cores | 12 | 8 |

| Threads | 24 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 3.50 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.50 GHz | 3.90 GHz |

| TDP | 165 W | 180 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 2066 | AMD Socket SP3 |

| Architecture | Skylake | Zen 2 |

| Codename | Skylake-X | Rome |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 7 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die Size | 484 mm² | 4x 74 mm² |

| Transistors | Not specified | 15,200 million |

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

| L3 Cache | 19.25 MB (shared) | 32 MB (per die), 128 MB total |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 85.3 GB/s | 204.8 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 44 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 128 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2018-10-18 | 2020-04-13 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Part Number | SREZ6 | 100-000000139 |