AMD EPYC 8024P vs Intel Core i9-9900K Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data presents a fascinating split. The AMD EPYC 8024P wins the majority of the recorded comparisons, taking 10 of 17 tests, but the Intel Core i9-9900K secures the remaining 7. The nature of those wins tells a clear story about each chip's design priorities.

Starting with the most dramatic margin, the EPYC 8024P crushes the i9-9900K in PassMark data encryption by 59.3% (15809 vs 6430). This is the single largest delta in the entire comparison. The EPYC also dominates in PassMark physics, scoring 1905 against 934, a 51% advantage. Prime number finding follows a similar pattern, with the EPYC at 109 versus the Intel chip's 47, a 56.9% gap. These are not marginal differences; they represent fundamental architectural strengths.

The Cinebench suite shows consistent, if smaller, EPYC victories. Across R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core tests show the EPYC ahead by roughly 12.2% to 12.5%. For example, Cinebench R23 multi-core scores 17472 for the EPYC versus 15333 for the Intel, and single-core shows 2466 versus 2164. The PassMark multithread test also favors the EPYC, with 20556 against 18153, an 11.7% edge.

The Intel i9-9900K, however, posts impressive wins in several specialized workloads. Its PassMark single-thread score of 2919 beats the EPYC's 2371 by 23.1%. Data compression is another Intel stronghold, with 283506 versus 232242, a 22.1% advantage. Extended instructions favor Intel by 33.1% (18965 vs 14251), and floating-point math goes Intel's way by 18.1% (41036 vs 34757). Integer math and random string sorting also go to Intel, though by slimmer margins of 6.4% and 4.7% respectively.

The average benchmark scores place these two close together overall. The i9-9900K holds an average benchmark score of 27097 with a 79th percentile ranking, while the EPYC 8024P sits at 26555 with a 78th percentile. Looking at nearest rivals, the i9-9900K sits within 0.7% of chips like the AMD Ryzen 7 5700G and Intel Core i7-1370P. The EPYC's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-11900K and Core i9-12900HK, with deltas of 0.3% or less. Both processors occupy similar overall performance tiers, but they reach those tiers through very different strengths.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmark tests?

A: The AMD EPYC 8024P wins 10 of the 17 recorded comparisons, while the Intel Core i9-9900K wins 7.

Q: How large is the EPYC's advantage in encryption workloads?

A: PassMark data encryption shows the EPYC 8024P scoring 15809 versus the i9-9900K's 6430, a 59.3% advantage, the largest margin in the entire comparison.

Q: Where does the Intel processor outperform the EPYC most significantly?

A: The i9-9900K leads by 23.1% in PassMark single-thread performance (2919 vs 2371) and by 22.1% in data compression (283506 vs 232242).

Q: Are the Cinebench results consistent across versions?

A: Yes, the EPYC 8024P leads by approximately 12.2% to 12.5% across all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests, covering both single-core and multi-core workloads.

Q: How do their overall average benchmark scores compare?

A: The i9-9900K has an average benchmark score of 27097, while the EPYC 8024P scores 26555, a difference of roughly 2%. Both sit within 0.7% of their nearest rivals in the database.

Q: Which chip has the higher PassMark physics score?

A: The AMD EPYC 8024P scores 1905 in PassMark physics, more than double the i9-9900K's 934, representing a 51% advantage.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD EPYC 8024P is the clear choice for throughput-oriented server workloads. Its wins in encryption, physics, prime number finding, and the entire Cinebench suite point to a design optimized for sustained multi-threaded computation. The 59.3% encryption advantage alone makes it compelling for security-focused tasks, database encryption, or any workload involving cryptographic operations. The 51% physics lead suggests strong floating-point throughput in simulation or scientific computing contexts. The consistent 12% Cinebench advantage across every version reinforces that this is a generational leap in raw compute efficiency.

The Intel Core i9-9900K, meanwhile, claims the workloads where latency and single-thread responsiveness matter most. Its 23.1% lead in PassMark single-thread score indicates snappier performance in lightly threaded applications, legacy software, or interactive workloads. The 22.1% data compression win makes it attractive for archiving, backup systems, or file server scenarios. Extended instructions, where Intel leads by 33.1%, could benefit specific optimized code paths in media encoding or scientific libraries. The floating-point math advantage of 18.1% suggests certain numerical workloads still favor Intel's older architecture.

Interestingly, the two chips split the integer and sorting workloads. Intel leads integer math by 6.4% and random string sorting by 4.7%, but these are modest margins. For mixed workloads, the EPYC's multithread advantage of 11.7% in PassMark might compensate for its single-thread deficit. The overall picture is clear: choose the EPYC for server density and parallel compute, choose the Intel for desktop responsiveness and specific single-threaded applications.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal two processors from different eras and markets. The Intel Core i9-9900K uses the Intel Socket 1151, while the EPYC 8024P uses AMD Socket SP6. Clock speeds differ substantially: the Intel chip has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, whereas the EPYC runs at 2.40 GHz base and 3.00 GHz boost. Despite this, the EPYC wins more benchmarks, indicating architectural efficiency matters more than raw clock rate.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The i9-9900K supports DDR4 on a dual-channel bus with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth, while the EPYC supports DDR5 on a six-channel bus with 230.4 GB/s, a massive bandwidth advantage. ECC memory is supported only on the EPYC. PCIe connectivity also differs: Intel offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes, while AMD provides Gen 5 with 96 lanes.

The i9-9900K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the EPYC has none. The Intel chip has an unlocked multiplier, the EPYC does not. Production status also differs: the Intel part is end-of-life, released in 2018, while the EPYC is active, released in 2023. The Intel launch MSRP is $488, and the EPYC launch MSRP is $409. TDP figures are close, 95 watts for Intel versus 90 watts for AMD.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two is generational. The Intel Core i9-9900K uses Coffee Lake architecture on a 14 nm process fabricated by Intel, with a die size of 180.3 mm². The AMD EPYC 8024P uses Zen 4c architecture on a 5 nm process from TSMC, with a die size of 73 mm². The EPYC packs 8,875 million transistors into that smaller die, a density that explains its efficiency gains.

Both processors have 8 cores and 16 threads, so the core count is identical. Cache hierarchies differ meaningfully. Both share 64 KB of L1 per core. The L2 cache is 256 KB per core on Intel versus 1 MB per core on AMD, a fourfold difference. L3 cache is 16 MB shared on Intel versus 32 MB shared on AMD, double the capacity. These cache advantages likely contribute to the EPYC's wins in encryption and physics workloads.

The EPYC's Zen 4c design is optimized for density and power efficiency in server environments. The i9-9900K's Coffee Lake architecture, despite being older and on a larger process node, still delivers competitive single-thread performance thanks to its high boost clock. The lack of integrated graphics on the EPYC frees die area for compute resources, while the Intel chip dedicates space to its UHD Graphics 630. The memory controller design also reflects their different markets: six-channel DDR5 on the EPYC versus dual-channel DDR4 on the Intel. These architectural choices explain why the EPYC dominates in memory-bandwidth-sensitive and highly parallel workloads, while the Intel chip holds its own in latency-sensitive single-thread tasks.

The Verdict

The data clearly separates these two processors by use case. The AMD EPYC 8024P is the superior processor for server and workstation deployments where multi-threaded throughput, memory bandwidth, and specialized instruction efficiency are paramount. Its 10 benchmark wins, including the 59.3% encryption advantage, 51% physics lead, and consistent 12% Cinebench superiority, demonstrate that modern architecture on a 5 nm process with double the L3 cache delivers measurable gains. The six-channel DDR5 memory support and 96 PCIe Gen 5 lanes further cement its position for enterprise infrastructure.

The Intel Core i9-9900K remains relevant for desktop users prioritizing single-thread performance and specific legacy workloads. Its 23.1% single-thread lead and 22.1% data compression advantage are significant for interactive applications. The 33.1% extended instructions win suggests certain optimized software still runs faster on Intel. However, its end-of-life status, older 14 nm process, and lower memory bandwidth limit its long-term viability.

For anyone building a new server or workstation, the EPYC 8024P is the data-backed choice. For a desktop system where legacy software compatibility and single-thread speed matter more than raw multithread throughput, the i9-9900K still holds value. The 79th versus 78th percentile rankings show they occupy similar overall tiers, but the distribution of wins tells you which workloads each handles best. Choose based on your workload mix, not headline numbers.