AMD EPYC 9015 vs Intel Core i9-13900 Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD EPYC 9015 and Intel Core i9-13900 serve completely different markets, and the benchmark data makes that split obvious. The Intel Core i9-13900 wins 9 of 11 head-to-head tests, including every major throughput metric, with multi-thread performance 32.8% higher, single-thread performance 24.2% higher, and floating-point math 48.9% higher. It is the clear choice for desktop workloads where raw speed across many threads matters. The AMD EPYC 9015 wins only 2 tests, but those wins are telling: it beats the i9-13900 by 63.4% in prime number finding and by 16.5% in physics calculations. That pattern, combined with its server platform, makes it the pick for scientific computing and server workloads that depend on those specific instruction patterns. The i9-13900 is a desktop part with 24 cores and 32 threads, while the EPYC 9015 is a server/workstation part with 8 cores and 16 threads, so the core count difference of 16 cores explains much of the throughput gap. If you need maximum core count and desktop-friendly performance, choose the i9-13900. If you need a server socket with specific math strengths and platform features like twelve-channel memory, choose the EPYC 9015.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-13900 dominates in almost every measured category. Its largest wins come in floating-point math, where it scores 120492 against 61615, a 48.9% advantage, and integer math, where it scores 176107 against 92524, a 47.5% advantage. Data encryption shows a 49.5% lead with 35242 versus 17790, and data compression shows a 38.8% lead with 577285 versus 353014. The i9-13900 also wins multi-thread with 45680 versus 30689, a 32.8% gap, and random string sorting by 38.2% with 64396 versus 39772. Single-thread performance favors Intel by 24.2% with 4309 versus 3265, and extended instructions go to Intel by 14.6% with 32760 versus 27970. The i9-13900 also has integrated graphics in the form of UHD Graphics 770, while the EPYC 9015 has none.

The AMD EPYC 9015 wins in two specific areas. Prime number finding shows a massive 63.4% advantage with 304 versus 186. Physics calculations go to AMD by 16.5% with 2893 versus 2484. These are narrow but consistent wins, suggesting the Zen 5 architecture handles those particular workloads more efficiently than Raptor Lake. For server workloads that involve prime number sieving or physics simulation, the EPYC 9015 offers a measurable benefit despite having fewer cores and threads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The AMD EPYC 9015 uses Zen 5 architecture with the Turin codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core i9-13900 uses Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-S codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. The EPYC 9015 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the i9-13900 has 24 cores and 32 threads, a 16-core and 16-thread difference that drives most of the multi-thread performance gap.

Cache layouts differ significantly. Both have 80 KB of L1 per core, but the EPYC 9015 has 1 MB of L2 per core while the i9-13900 has 2 MB per core. The L3 cache is inverted: the EPYC 9015 has 64 MB shared, while the i9-13900 has 36 MB shared. The EPYC 9015 has a die size of 2x 70.6 mm² with 16,630 million transistors, while the i9-13900 has a single 257 mm² die with no transistor count listed in the database.

Platform features are where the two diverge most sharply. The EPYC 9015 uses AMD Socket SP5, supports DDR5 memory over a twelve-channel bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, and offers PCIe Gen 5 with 128 lanes. The i9-13900 uses Intel Socket 1700, supports both DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with no bandwidth figure recorded, and offers PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes. Both support ECC memory. The EPYC 9015 has no integrated graphics, while the i9-13900 includes UHD Graphics 770. The EPYC 9015 has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz, while the i9-13900 has a base clock of 2000.00 MHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The TDP values are 125 for the EPYC and 65 for the i9-13900. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The EPYC 9015 launched on 2024-10-09 with a launch MSRP of $527, while the i9-13900 launched on 2023-01-03 with a launch MSRP of $549. Both are currently Active in production status.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher single-thread score?

A: The Intel Core i9-13900 scores 4309 in passmark_single_thread with a score of 4309, while the AMD EPYC 9015 scores 3265. Intel leads by 24.2% in this test.

Q: How does memory bandwidth compare?

A: The AMD EPYC 9015 has a twelve-channel memory bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel Core i9-13900 has a dual-channel bus with no bandwidth figure recorded. The EPYC also supports DDR5 only, while the i9-13900 supports both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: Which CPU is better for physics workloads?

A: The AMD EPYC 9015 wins passmark_physics with a score of 2893 against 2484, a 16.5% advantage. This is one of only two head-to-head wins for the EPYC 9015.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The AMD EPYC 9015 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core i9-13900 has 24 cores and 32 threads.

Q: Does either CPU include integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i9-13900 includes UHD Graphics 770. The AMD EPYC 9015 lists N/A for integrated graphics.

Q: Which CPU has the larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD EPYC 9015 has 64 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core i9-13900 has 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC 9015 has nearly double the L3 capacity.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a lopsided contest in raw throughput. The Intel Core i9-13900 wins 9 of 11 tests, and its margins are substantial in most categories. The largest Intel win is in data encryption, where it scores 35242 against 17790, a 49.5% advantage. Floating-point math follows at 48.9% with 120492 against 120492. Integer math shows a 47.5% lead with 176107 versus 92524. Multi-thread performance favors Intel by 32.8% with 45680 versus 45680. Data compression shows a 38.8% Intel lead with 577285 against 353014, 353014. Random string sorting goes to Intel by 38.2% with 64396 versus 39772. Single-thread performance, measured as passmark_single_thread with a score of 4309 for Intel and 3265, 3265 for AMD, shows a 24.2% gap. Extended instructions favor Intel by 14.6% with 32760 versus 27970.

The AMD EPYC 9015 wins 2 of 11 tests, and both wins are meaningful for specific workloads. Prime number finding shows a 63.4% advantage with 304 against 186. Physics calculations go to AMD by 16.5% with 2893 against 2484. These wins are isolated to those two tests, but the prime number result in particular is a large margin that suggests architectural strength in that workload.

The average benchmark score in the database records the i9-13900 at 60676 and the EPYC 9015 at 57555, a difference that places the Intel part 1% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X and 1.1% ahead of the Intel Core i9-14900F in its nearest rival list. The EPYC 9015 sits 0.1% above the Ryzen 9 9900X and 0.3% above the EPYC 7313 in its own nearest rival list. Both CPUs rank in the 92nd percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across every major specification category. Core count: the EPYC 9015 has 8 cores while the i9-13900 has 24 cores. Thread count: 16 versus 32. Base clock: the EPYC 9015 lists 3.60 GHz while the i9-13900 lists 2000.00 MHz. Boost clock: 4.10 GHz for the EPYC, 5.60 GHz for Intel. TDP: 125 for the EPYC, 65 for Intel. Socket: AMD Socket SP5 versus Intel Socket 1700. Architecture: Zen 5 for the EPYC, Raptor Lake for Intel. Process node: 4 nm at TSMC for AMD, 10 nm at Intel for Intel. Die size: 2x 70.6 mm² for the EPYC, 257 mm² for Intel. Transistors: 16,610 million for the EPYC, none recorded for the i9-13900.

Cache differs per core and in L3. L1 per core is 80 KB per core for both. L2 per core is 1 MB for the EPYC versus 2 MB for Intel. L3 is 64 MB shared for the EPYC, 36 MB shared for Intel. Memory support: DDR5 for the EPYC, DDR4 and DDR5 for Intel. Memory bus: twelve-channel for the EPYC, dual-channel for Intel. Memory bandwidth is 576.0 GB/s for the EPYC, none recorded for Intel. PCIe lanes: Gen 5 with 128 lanes for the EPYC, Gen 5 with 16 lanes for Intel. Integrated graphics is N/A for the EPYC and UHD Graphics 770 for Intel. Market segment is Server/Workstation for the EPYC and Desktop. Release date is 2024-10-09 for the EPYC, 2023-01-03 for Intel. Multiplier is not unlocked for either CPU part number 100-000001553 for the EPYC and SRMB6 for Intel.