AMD EPYC 9554P vs Intel Core i9-11900H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive sweep for the AMD EPYC 9554P across all six shared Cinebench tests. The smallest margin of victory is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the EPYC scores 89,490 versus 16,772 for the Intel Core i9-11900H, a 433.6% advantage. Even the closest comparison, single-threaded performance, is not close at all: the EPYC leads by 433.7% in every single-core Cinebench test, including R15, R20, and R23.

The pattern is consistent and striking. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 9554P records 9,020 points while the i9-11900H manages 1,690, a 433.7% gap. The R20 multi-core test shows 37,585 versus 7,044, a 433.6% difference. Single-core results follow the same shape: R15 single-core is 1,273 versus 238 (434.9% lead), R20 single-core is 5,305 versus 994 (433.7%), and R23 single-core is 12,633 versus 2,367 (433.7%).

These deltas are almost uniform, which suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-specific. The EPYC 9554P does not merely win; it multiplies the Intel part's output by roughly 5.3 to 5.4 times in every recorded Cinebench metric. There are no benchmark categories in the head-to-head data where the Intel chip takes a win. The recorded wins stand at 6 for the AMD EPYC 9554P and 0 for the Intel Core i9-11900H.

The average benchmark score tells a similar story at a higher level. The EPYC 9554P averages 21,899 across its recorded tests, while the i9-11900H averages 21,367. Both parts sit at the 75th percentile among all CPUs in the database, which places them in the same broad performance tier despite the head-to-head blowout. The nearest rivals for the EPYC include the AMD EPYC 9534 at 21,900 (0% delta), the Intel Core i7-11700 at 21,891 (0%), and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 6650U at 21,874 (0.1% ahead). The Intel part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V at 21,440 (0.3% behind), the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 at 21,484 (0.5% behind), and the AMD EPYC 9454 at 21,223 (0.7% ahead).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from completely different design philosophies. The AMD EPYC 9554P is a 64-core, 128-thread server processor built on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Genoa. It belongs to the EPYC 9004 series and uses TSMC's 5 nm process node. The Intel Core i9-11900H is an 8-core, 16-thread mobile processor built on the Tiger Lake-H architecture, part of Intel's 11th Gen Core series, manufactured on Intel's 10 nm node.

The transistor counts reflect the scale difference. The EPYC 9554P packs 52,560 million transistors across a multi-die design measuring 8x 72 mm². The Intel chip uses a monolithic 190 mm² die, and the database does not list a transistor count for it. The EPYC's design spreads across eight chiplets, each 72 mm², while the Intel part is a single piece of silicon.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The EPYC 9554P allocates 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a massive 256 MB of shared L3. The Intel i9-11900H gives each core 80 KB of L1 and 1.25 MB of L2, with only 24 MB of shared L3. The EPYC's L3 cache is more than ten times larger, which matters for workloads that repeatedly access large datasets.

Memory architecture is another fundamental split. The EPYC 9554P supports DDR5 over a twelve-channel memory bus, delivering 460.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part supports DDR4 over a dual-channel bus, with 51.2 GB/s. That is a nine-fold difference in theoretical memory bandwidth. ECC memory is supported on the EPYC but not on the Intel chip. PCIe connectivity also diverges: the EPYC provides Gen 5 with 128 lanes, while the Intel part provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes.

The Intel i9-11900H includes integrated graphics in the form of UHD Graphics 750, while the EPYC 9554P has no integrated graphics listed. The EPYC is a server/workstation part, currently active in production. The Intel chip is a mobile part, now marked end-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 9554P wins everywhere that the shared benchmark suite reaches. Multi-threaded rendering, single-threaded rendering, and every Cinebench variant in the head-to-head list go to the AMD part. The 433.7% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core and the 433.6% lead in R23 multi-core indicate that the EPYC's 64 cores and 128 threads utterly overwhelm the Intel's 8 cores and 16 threads in heavily parallel workloads.

Single-core results are more telling. The EPYC 9554P leads by 434.9% in Cinebench R15 single-core and by 433.7% in R20 and R23 single-core. This is not a case where the Intel chip's higher boost clock (4.90 GHz versus 3.75 GHz) translates into a win. The EPYC's Zen 4 architecture delivers higher per-thread performance despite the lower clock ceiling. The Intel i9-11900H does have its own benchmark record in the database, including a 3DMark 16-thread score of 6,072, a 3DMark single-thread score of 917, and a PassMark single-thread score of 3,102, but there are no comparable EPYC results in the recorded data for those specific tests.

The Intel chip also shows strengths in its own benchmark set that the database does not record for the EPYC. PassMark integer math at 72,882, floating point math at 43,094, and data compression at 239,366 are all measured for the i9-11900H. However, without matching EPYC scores for these tests, no direct comparison is possible. The head-to-head data is limited to Cinebench, and in that suite, the EPYC is the only winner.

For use-case planning, the EPYC 9554P is the clear choice for server racks, virtualization hosts, and workstation rendering where Cinebench-style all-core and single-core workloads dominate. The Intel i9-11900H, with its 35 W TDP and mobile socket, belongs in laptops where power limits and physical space constrain the design. Its end-of-life status means new designs should look elsewhere, but existing systems can still rely on its recorded performance.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in nearly every specification field. Core count: 64 versus 8. Thread count: 128 versus 16. Base clock: 3.10 GHz versus 2.10 GHz. Boost clock: 3.75 GHz versus 4.90 GHz. TDP: 360 W versus 35 W. Socket: AMD Socket SP5 versus Intel BGA 1787. Architecture: Zen 4 versus Tiger Lake. Process node: 5 nm versus 10 nm. Foundry: TSMC versus Intel.

Cache and memory specifications diverge sharply. L1 per core is 64 KB on the EPYC versus 80 KB on the Intel. L2 per core is 1 MB versus 1.25 MB. L3 shared cache is 256 MB versus 24 MB. Memory support is DDR5 versus DDR4. Memory bus is twelve-channel versus dual-channel. Memory bandwidth is 460.8 GB/s versus 51.2 GB/s. ECC support is present on the EPYC, absent on the Intel. PCIe is Gen 5 with 128 lanes versus Gen 4 with 20 lanes. Integrated graphics: none on the EPYC, UHD Graphics 750 on the Intel.

Market segment differs: Server/Workstation versus Mobile. Production status: Active versus End-of-life. Release dates: the EPYC launched on 2022-11-09, the Intel on 2021-05-10. Launch MSRP: the EPYC 9554P is $7,104, the i9-11900H is $546. Both are multiplier-unlocked false. The part numbers are 100-100000804 for the EPYC and SRKT7 for the Intel.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD EPYC 9554P scores 89,490 versus 16,772 for the Intel Core i9-11900H, a 433.6% lead.

Q: Does the Intel Core i9-11900H win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows 6 wins for the AMD EPYC 9554P and 0 for the Intel part across all six Cinebench tests.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The EPYC 9554P has 256 MB of shared L3. The i9-11900H has 24 MB of shared L3.

Q: What memory types do the two CPUs support?

A: The EPYC 9554P supports DDR5 over a twelve-channel bus with 460.8 GB/s bandwidth. The i9-11900H supports DDR4 over a dual-channel bus with 51.2 GB/s.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No. The EPYC 9554P is marked Active. The i9-11900H is marked End-of-life.

Q: Does the Intel chip have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the i9-11900H includes UHD Graphics 750. The EPYC 9554P has no integrated graphics listed.

The Verdict

The AMD EPYC 9554P is the performance winner in every recorded head-to-head test. Its 64 cores, 128 threads, 256 MB L3 cache, and twelve-channel DDR5 support make it a server-class processor designed for maximum throughput. The 433.7% average lead across Cinebench tests means it is not merely faster; it is in a different performance category. Anyone building a rack server, a heavy virtualization host, or a multi-threaded workstation should pick the EPYC 9554P without hesitation.

The Intel Core i9-11900H is a mobile processor with a 35 W TDP, a BGA socket, and integrated graphics. Its 4.90 GHz boost clock is the highest in this comparison, but the recorded single-core Cinebench scores show the EPYC still wins by over 434% in those tests. The i9-11900H is end-of-life, so new laptop designs should not use it. Existing systems with this chip can still handle PassMark integer math at 72,882 and floating point at 43,094, but the database does not provide matching EPYC scores for those tests.

The verdict from the data is straightforward. The EPYC 9554P is for servers and workstations where power budget and socket size are secondary concerns. The i9-11900H is a legacy mobile part whose remaining role is in already-shipped laptops, not new deployments. Buyers choosing between these two in a new system should select the EPYC 9554P unless the platform physically requires a mobile BGA chip. The price difference is substantial, but the performance gap is proportionally larger in every measured category.