AMD EPYC 9015 vs Intel Core i9-14900 Comparison

The Intel Core i9-14900 and AMD EPYC 9015 represent two fundamentally different approaches to computing, yet they land within 1% of each other in average benchmark score. The data shows a clear split: the desktop-oriented Intel part dominates most throughput tests, while the server-focused AMD chip wins in specific latency-sensitive workloads. This comparison is less about overall speed and more about what each processor is optimized to do.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-14900 wins 9 of the 11 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, establishing a broad lead across most computational tasks. Its biggest advantages appear in floating-point math, integer math, and multithreaded workloads, where it posts margins between 45% and 95% over the EPYC 9015. The data suggests Intel’s part is the general-purpose powerhouse, excelling in scenarios that scale with core count and raw execution throughput.

The AMD EPYC 9015 wins only 2 benchmarks, but they are telling. It takes the passmark_find_prime_numbers test with a score of 304 versus Intel’s 188, a 38.2% advantage. It also wins passmark_physics with 2893 versus 2486, a 14.1% margin. These wins point to a processor that handles single-threaded latency and integer-heavy algorithms efficiently, despite having only 8 cores compared to Intel’s 24. The EPYC’s wins are narrow in count but significant in what they reveal about its architecture.

Architecture Differences

The two chips could not be more different in design philosophy. The Intel Core i9-14900 uses Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process from Intel’s own foundry, packing 24 cores and 32 threads. It features a 2 MB L2 cache per core and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC 9015 uses Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm process from TSMC, with 8 cores and 16 threads. Its cache layout is distinct: 1 MB L2 per core but a much larger 64 MB shared L3.

The EPYC 9015 compensates for fewer cores with a higher base clock of 3.60 GHz versus Intel’s 2.00 GHz, though Intel’s boost clock reaches 5.80 GHz versus the EPYC’s 4.10 GHz. The EPYC also brings 16,630 million transistors across a dual-die design (2x 70.6 mm²), while Intel uses a single 257 mm² die. Memory support diverges sharply: Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, while the EPYC supports only DDR5 but over a twelve-channel bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. PCIe lanes also differ dramatically, with the EPYC offering 128 Gen 5 lanes versus Intel’s 16.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single margin belongs to Intel in floating-point math, scoring 120262 against the EPYC’s 61615, a 95.2% advantage. Integer math follows closely, with Intel at 175010 versus 92524, an 89.2% lead. Data encryption shows a similar pattern: Intel scores 33540 versus 17790, an 88.5% edge. These three tests indicate Intel’s core count and higher boost clocks translate directly into raw arithmetic throughput.

Intel also wins data compression decisively, 550271 versus 353014, a 55.9% margin. Random string sorting goes to Intel at 61060 versus 39772, a 53.5% lead. The multithread test shows Intel at 44578 versus 30689, a 45.3% advantage. Single-thread performance favors Intel as well, with 4323 versus 3265, a 32.4% edge. Extended instructions are closer, with Intel winning 30624 versus 27970, a modest 9.5% margin.

The AMD EPYC 9015’s wins are smaller in count but not in significance. In find prime numbers, it scores 304 versus Intel’s 188, a 38.2% advantage that suggests its Zen 5 cores handle integer loops more efficiently per clock. In physics, it scores 2893 versus 2486, a 14.1% win that may reflect lower latency access to its larger L3 cache. These are the exceptions to Intel’s dominance, but they indicate the EPYC is not simply slower—it is differently optimized.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900 has an average benchmark score of 58115, while the AMD EPYC 9015 scores 57555. Intel leads by approximately 1% according to the deltaPct of -1 in the EPYC’s nearestRivals listing.

Q: How do the core counts compare between the two?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900 has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the AMD EPYC 9015 has 8 cores and 16 threads. This is a 16-core and 16-thread difference in Intel’s favor.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD EPYC 9015 has 64 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core i9-14900 has 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC’s cache is nearly double the size.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD EPYC 9015 supports twelve-channel DDR5 memory with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel Core i9-14900 supports dual-channel DDR4 or DDR5 with no bandwidth figure listed in the data.

Q: In which benchmark does the AMD EPYC 9015 show its largest win?

A: The EPYC’s largest win is in passmark_find_prime_numbers, where it scores 304 against Intel’s 188, a 38.2% advantage.

Q: What is the launch MSRP for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900 has a launch MSRP of $549, and the AMD EPYC 9015 has a launch MSRP of $527.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear choice for users prioritizing raw throughput: the Intel Core i9-14900 wins 9 of 11 benchmarks and leads in average score by 1%. Its advantages in floating-point math (95.2%), integer math (89.2%), and multithreading (45.3%) make it the obvious selection for rendering, compilation, or any workload that leverages many cores and high boost clocks. The 24-core count and 5.80 GHz boost clock are reflected in every major benchmark result.

The AMD EPYC 9015 is not without merit, but its strengths are narrower. It wins in prime number finding and physics, which suggests it handles certain integer and latency-sensitive tasks better. Its 64 MB L3 cache and 576.0 GB/s memory bandwidth are substantial assets for server workloads, and its 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes dwarf Intel’s 16. However, for benchmark-driven comparison, the EPYC’s 8 cores limit its throughput in most tests, and its 4.10 GHz boost cannot match Intel’s 5.80 GHz ceiling.

For a desktop user comparing single-processor performance, the Intel Core i9-14900 is the data-backed winner. For a server architect evaluating memory bandwidth, cache size, and PCIe scalability, the EPYC 9015 offers infrastructure advantages that benchmarks like passmark do not fully capture. The numbers favor Intel for computation, but the EPYC’s platform features tell a different story for enterprise deployment.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i9-14900 | AMD EPYC 9015 |

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

| Cores | 24 | 8 |

| Threads | 32 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.80 GHz | 4.10 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 125 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | AMD Socket SP5 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Zen 5 |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-R | Turin |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 4 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not listed | 16,630 million |

| Die Size | 257 mm² | 2x 70.6 mm² |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 36 MB (shared) | 64 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Twelve-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not listed | 576.0 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes | Gen 5, 128 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | N/A |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | 2024-01-07 | 2024-10-09 |

| Launch MSRP | $549 | $527 |