AMD EPYC 9115 vs Intel Core i7-14700KF Comparison

The Intel Core i7-14700KF and AMD EPYC 9115 both occupy the 96th percentile of all CPUs, with average benchmark scores of 70104 and 69887 respectively. That 0.3% gap in average score is the narrowest margin between the two, but the underlying benchmark results reveal a sharp split in workload behavior. The Intel part wins 13 of 17 head-to-head tests, while the AMD EPYC takes 4. These are not interchangeable processors; they are aimed at different sockets, memory architectures, and market segments.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i7-14700KF dominates single-threaded workloads. In Passmark single-thread, it scores 4480 against the EPYC's 3377, a 32.7% advantage. That is the largest delta in the entire comparison. The same pattern appears in Cinebench: R15 single-core 633 vs 597 (+6%), R20 single-core 2641 vs 2490 (+6.1%), and R23 single-core 6290 vs 5929 (+6.1%). The Intel chip’s boost clock of 5.60 GHz versus 4.10 GHz on the EPYC explains part of this, though the architecture also plays a role.

In multi-threaded tests, the Intel part still leads, but by a smaller margin. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 44557 vs 42003, a 6.1% win. R20 multi-core: 18713 vs 17641 (+6.1%). R15 multi-core: 4491 vs 4233 (+6.1%). Passmark multithread: 52425 vs 49416 (+6.1%). These consistent 6.1% deltas across all Cinebench versions suggest a systematic advantage in that specific workload family.

The Intel chip also wins in data compression, encryption, floating-point math, and random string sorting. Passmark data compression: 694963 vs 604120, a 15% lead. Data encryption: 40046 vs 33914, an 18.1% lead. Floating-point math: 134393 vs 115955, a 15.9% lead. Random string sorting: 74723 vs 71473, a 4.5% lead. These are all integer or FP-heavy operations where the higher clocks and larger L2 cache (2 MB per core vs 1 MB) appear to help.

The AMD EPYC 9115 wins four tests, and two of them are decisive. Passmark physics: 4198 vs 2961, a 29.5% margin for AMD. Passmark find prime numbers: 285 vs 212, a 25.6% margin. Extended instructions: 45686 vs 40660, an 11% margin. Integer math: 183390 vs 183056, a razor-thin 0.2% margin. The physics result is particularly striking — the EPYC more than doubles the per-core physics score relative to its single-thread performance, suggesting a very different scheduling and memory behavior.

Overall, the Intel part wins 13 tests, the AMD wins 4. The Intel wins are spread across every Cinebench variant, single-thread, multithread, compression, encryption, floating point, and sorting. The AMD wins are concentrated in physics, prime-number finding, extended instruction sets, and a near-tie in integer math.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from opposite design philosophies. The Intel Core i7-14700KF is built on Intel's 10 nm process (Raptor Lake-R, a refresh of Raptor Lake) and uses a 257 mm² die. The AMD EPYC 9115 is on TSMC's 4 nm process (Zen 5, codename Turin) and uses a dual-die configuration with 2x 70.6 mm², totaling 16,630 million transistors. The Intel die has no transistor count listed; the AMD figure is explicit.

Core and thread counts differ. The Intel has 20 cores and 28 threads; the AMD has 16 cores and 32 threads. That means the AMD has fewer physical cores but more threads, thanks to simultaneous multithreading (SMT) on each core. The Intel part also uses a hybrid architecture (performance and efficiency cores) but the FACT PACK does not specify that; it only lists total cores and threads. The AMD has a uniform Zen 5 core design.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. Both have 80 KB L1 per core, but L2 is 2 MB per core on Intel versus 1 MB per core on AMD. L3 is 33 MB shared on Intel versus 64 MB shared on AMD. The AMD's larger L3 could benefit workloads with large working sets, but the Intel's larger L2 per core helps latency-sensitive single-thread tasks.

Memory support is a major differentiator. The Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus. The AMD supports only DDR5 but over a twelve-channel bus, with a listed memory bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s. The Intel has no listed memory bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity also diverges: Intel provides Gen 5, 16 lanes (CPU only), while AMD provides Gen 5, 128 lanes (CPU only). That 8x difference in lane count is a clear server-oriented feature.

Sockets are incompatible: Intel Socket 1700 versus AMD Socket SP5. The Intel part has an unlocked multiplier; the AMD does not. The Intel was released on 2023-10-16, the AMD on 2024-10-09. Both are currently active in production. The Intel has a launch MSRP of $384, the AMD has a launch MSRP of $726.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-14700KF wins in every Cinebench test, both single- and multi-core, and in Passmark multithread, single-thread, data compression, data encryption, floating-point math, and random string sorting. These are typical desktop productivity and content-creation workloads. The Intel part’s higher boost clock (5.60 GHz vs 4.10 GHz) and larger per-core L2 cache (2 MB vs 1 MB) give it a clear edge in latency-sensitive and single-threaded tasks.

The AMD EPYC 9115 wins in physics simulation (Passmark physics), prime-number finding (Passmark find prime numbers), extended instruction set performance (Passmark extended instructions), and integer math (by 0.2%). The physics result is notable: a 29.5% lead despite a 32.7% deficit in single-thread performance. That suggests the EPYC’s twelve-channel memory bandwidth (576.0 GB/s) and larger shared L3 (64 MB) are more important for physics calculations than raw clock speed. The extended instructions win also indicates that the Zen 5 core handles AVX-512 or similar vector workloads more efficiently than Raptor Lake, though the FACT PACK does not specify which instruction sets are tested.

In terms of raw benchmark score, the Intel part averages 70104 versus 69887 for the AMD — a 0.3% difference. The nearest rival for both is the Intel Core i7-14700K, which scores 70074 on average. The AMD is 0.3% behind the i7-14700KF and 0.3% ahead of the i7-14700K? Actually the AMD's nearest rivals list shows the i7-14700K at -0.3% and the i7-14700KF at -0.3% relative to the AMD. So the AMD is essentially tied with the i7-14700K and i7-14700KF in average score, but the benchmark distribution is very different.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700KF wins Passmark single-thread by 32.7% (4480 vs 3377) and wins all Cinebench single-core tests by 6.0–6.1% (e.g., R23 single-core 6290 vs 5929).

Q: How do the cache sizes compare?

A: Both have 80 KB L1 per core. The Intel has 2 MB L2 per core and 33 MB shared L3. The AMD has 1 MB L2 per core and 64 MB shared L3.

Q: Which supports more memory channels?

A: The AMD EPYC 9115 supports twelve-channel DDR5 with a listed bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s. The Intel Core i7-14700KF supports dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5, with no bandwidth figure listed.

Q: What is the difference in PCIe lane count?

A: The Intel provides Gen 5, 16 lanes (CPU only). The AMD provides Gen 5, 128 lanes (CPU only) — an 8x difference.

Q: Which has more threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 9115 has 32 threads across 16 cores, while the Intel Core i7-14700KF has 28 threads across 20 cores. The AMD has fewer cores but more threads.

Q: What are the release dates?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700KF was released on 2023-10-16. The AMD EPYC 9115 was released on 2024-10-09.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core i7-14700KF | AMD EPYC 9115 |

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

| Cores | 20 | 16 |

| Threads | 28 | 32 |

| Base clock | 3.40 GHz | 2.60 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.60 GHz | 4.10 GHz |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | AMD Socket SP5 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake (Raptor Lake-R) | Zen 5 (Turin) |

| Process node | 10 nm (Intel) | 4 nm (TSMC) |

| Die size | 257 mm² | 2x 70.6 mm² |

| Transistors | not listed | 16,630 million |

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

| L3 cache | 33 MB (shared) | 64 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 only |

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Twelve-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | not listed | 576.0 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 128 lanes (CPU only) |

| Multiplier unlocked | Yes | No |

| Release date | 2023-10-16 | 2024-10-09 |

| Launch MSRP | $384 | $726 |

| Market segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

Both have a TDP of 125 W, ECC memory support, no integrated graphics, and are active in production.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split. The Intel Core i7-14700KF is the better choice for any workload that is single-threaded, latency-sensitive, or dominated by compression, encryption, or floating-point math. It wins 13 of 17 head-to-head tests, including every Cinebench variant and Passmark multithread. Its 32.7% lead in single-thread performance and 18.1% lead in encryption make it the stronger pick for desktop applications, content creation, and general productivity.

The AMD EPYC 9115, despite losing the majority of benchmarks, wins decisively in physics simulation (29.5% ahead), prime-number finding (25.6% ahead), and extended instruction sets (11% ahead). Its twelve-channel memory bus and 64 MB L3 cache are the likely reasons. For server or workstation workloads that rely on memory bandwidth, vectorized instruction sets, or physics calculations, the EPYC 9115 is the better fit — even though its average score is 0.3% lower.

The launch MSRP of $384 for the Intel and $726 for the AMD reflects their intended markets, but the benchmark data does not show a price-performance relationship; the Intel wins more tests at a lower launch MSRP. However, the AMD’s 128 PCIe lanes and twelve-channel memory are features the Intel cannot match, and those are critical for many server deployments. Choose the Intel for single-thread and desktop tasks; choose the AMD for memory-bandwidth-heavy server workloads and applications that exploit its physics and extended-instruction strengths.