AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P vs Intel Core i9-14900KF Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i9-14900KF dominates the head-to-head comparison, winning 14 of the 17 recorded benchmarks. The AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P takes only 3 wins, but those wins are concentrated in specific workloads where its architecture provides a clear advantage. The overall average benchmark scores reflect this split, with the Intel part at 79,371 and the AMD part at 76,492, a margin of roughly 3.7%.

The single-thread gap is the most striking story in the dataset. Intel's Passmark single-thread score of 4,685 demolishes AMD's 2,357, a delta of 98.8%. That is nearly double the performance in workloads relying on one core. Cinebench R15 single-core shows the same pattern, Intel at 702 versus 590 for AMD, a 19% difference. The R20 and R23 single-core tests each show Intel ahead by 18. The boost clock of 6.00 GHz against AMD's 3.00 GHz explains the shape of these results, though the database records show the measured outcome, not the cause.

Multi-thread workloads also favors Intel across the board, though by a much more consistent margin. Cinebench R15 multicore, R20 multicore, and R23 multicore all show Intel at 4,976, 20,735, and 49,370 respectively, each 18.8% above AMD's 4,187, 17,447, 24, and 41,542. Passmark multithread shows Intel at 58,405 versus 48,873 for AMD, a 19.5% delta, the largest multi-thread win in the Passmark suite. Data compression and floating-point math are also firmly Intel territory, with the compression test at 785,831 versus 681,754, a 15.3% delta, and floating-point math at 151,918 versus 120,066 for AMD, the biggest non-single-thread win at 26.5%. Integer math is closer at 8.2% (Intel 209,125, AMD 193,256), and random string sorting is a near draw at 1.2% (86,564 versus 85,505). Data encryption rounds out the Intel wins at 6.4%, with scores of 46,416 and 43,619.

AMD's three wins carry outsized weight in specific areas. Passmark physics, where AMD scores 4,110 versus 3,159 for Intel, is a 23.1% lead, the largest positive delta in the entire comparison for AMD and the only double-digit one. Extended instructions give AMD the second win: 46,091 versus 46,039 for Intel, a modest 2.1% margin that still favors AMD in that workload. Find prime numbers is the third and final AMD win, 286 versus 231 for AMD's 19.2% advantage. These three tests reward AMD's Zen 4c design in ways that the Cinebench suite does not capture. AMD's wins in extended instructions and prime number generation show where its per-thread throughput on integer-heavy loops and specialized instruction paths outpaces Intel despite the general single-thread gap.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900KF. Its Passmark single-thread score of 4,685 is 98.8% higher than the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P's 2,357, and its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 6,969 beats AMD's 5,864 by 18.8%.

Q: Does the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P win any benchmark by a large margin?

A: Yes, in Passmark physics it scores 4,110 versus Intel's 3,159, a 23.1% lead. It also wins find prime numbers (286 versus 231, a 19.2% lead) and extended instructions (46,091 versus 44,839, a 2.7% lead).

Q: How do the two compare in multithreaded performance?

A: Intel wins every multi-thread benchmark in the set. Passmark multithread is 58,405 versus 48,873 for AMD, a 19.5% delta. Cinebench R23 multicore is 49,370 versus 41,542, also an 18.8% delta in Intel's favor.

Q: What is the total benchmark score difference between the two?

A: Intel's average benchmark score is 79,371, AMD's is 76,492. The difference is about 3.8% in Intel's favor, despite Intel winning 14 of 17 head-to-head tests.

Q: Are both processors in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both are in the 95th percentile against all CPUs in the database, even though Intel's average benchmark score is higher.

Q: Which processor has more memory channels?

A: AMD has a six-channel memory bus, while Intel has dual-channel. AMD also lists memory bandwidth of 230.4 GB/s, while Intel's bandwidth is not recorded in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from completely different design philosophies. Intel's Core i9-14900KF uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-R, built on Intel's 10 nm process with a die size of 257 mm². AMD's EPYC Embedded 8224P uses Zen 4c, codenamed Siena, built on TSMC's 5 nm process with two dies of 73 mm² each, totaling 146 mm², and 17,750 million transistors.

Core counts are identical at 24, but thread counts differ: Intel has 32 threads, AMD has 48. AMD's Zen 4c design favors throughput per die with higher thread density, while Intel pairs 8 performance cores with 16 efficient cores to reach 24 total, and its 32 threads include Hyper-Threading on the performance cores. The base clock is 3.20 GHz for Intel versus 2.55 GHz for AMD, and boost is 6.00 GHz versus 3.00 GHz. Intel's clock advantage is enormous, and it directly shows in the single-thread test results.

Cache layouts diverge sharply. Intel allocates 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. AMD uses 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3. AMD's L3 is nearly double Intel's, which helps in workloads with large working sets. The L1 and L2 are smaller on a per-core basis for AMD, but the thread count compensates in throughput tests.

Memory support also differs. Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus. AMD supports only DDR5 but has a six-channel bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 230.4 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity is a major differentiator: Intel provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while AMD provides Gen 5 with 96 lanes (CPU only). That sixfold lane count makes AMD the connectivity leader.

The socket and platform targets are different worlds. Intel uses Socket 1700 and is a desktop part with an unlocked multiplier. AMD uses Socket SP6, is a server or workstation part, and has a locked multiplier. Intel's production status is active, released 2023-10-16, with a launch MSRP of $564. AMD's production status is also active, released 2023-09-17, with no launch MSRP recorded. Intel's foundry is Intel itself, AMD's foundry is TSMC.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i9-14900KF | AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P |

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

| Threads | 32 | 48 |

| Base clock | 3.20 GHz | 2.55 GHz |

| Boost clock | 6.00 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| TDP | 125 W | 160 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | AMD Socket SP6 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Zen 4c |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-R | Siena |

| Process node | 10 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 17,750 million |

| Die size | 257 mm² | 2x 73 mm² |

| L1 cache | 80 KB per core | 64 KB per core |

| 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 | Six-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | Not recorded | 230.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 lanes | Gen 5, 96 lanes |

| Market segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Release date | 2023-10-16 | 2023-09-17 |

| Multiplier unlocked | Yes | No |

| Part number | SRN49 | 100-000001418 |

The TDP difference matters for platform planning. Intel's 125 W TDP is lower than AMD's 160 W, and Intel achieves its benchmark wins with that lower power envelope. AMD's higher TDP aligns with its server positioning, where sustained multi-thread load and large memory bandwidth are priorities.

The Verdict

The data gives a clear answer for most workloads: the Intel Core i9-14900KF is the faster processor in 14 of 17 benchmarks, and its wins include every Cinebench test, every Passmark throughput test except three, and all single-thread tests by a wide margin. The 98.8% single-thread advantage is the defining result. Any workload that is latency-sensitive, lightly threaded, or dependent on per-core speed will favor Intel without qualification.

The AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P is not a general-purpose competitor in the same class. Its three wins are specific: Passmark physics, find prime numbers, and extended instructions. Those are narrow but real wins. For tasks that stress integer loops, physics simulation, or specialized instruction throughput, AMD has a measurable edge. Its 48 threads versus 32 also matter in heavily threaded server contexts, though the benchmark results show Intel still winning the multi-thread tests that the database records. The Cinebench R23 multicore scores, 49,370 for Intel versus 41,542 for AMD, prove that thread count alone does not guarantee throughput.

The platform story is the other major factor. AMD offers 96 PCIe lanes, six-channel DDR5, and 230.4 GB/s memory bandwidth. Intel offers 16 PCIe lanes, dual-channel memory, and DDR4 compatibility. For embedded or server deployments where I/O expansion and memory bandwidth dominate, AMD's architecture is built for that role. For desktop performance, Intel's socket, unlocked multiplier, and lower TDP make it the straightforward pick.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-14900KF wins everywhere that single-thread or general multi-thread performance is the deciding factor. The Cinebench suite is entirely Intel's: R15, R20, and R23, both single and multicore, all at 18.8% or 19% deltas. Passmark multithread, data compression, data encryption, floating-point math, integer math, random string sorting, and single-thread all go to Intel. The largest Intel wins are single-thread at 98.8%, floating-point math at 26.5%, and multithread at 19.5%. Anyone running rendering, content creation, general productivity, or gaming will see the Intel advantage in the recorded scores.

The AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P wins in physics simulation, with a 23.1% lead over Intel in Passmark physics. It also wins find prime numbers by 19.2% and extended instructions by 2.7%. These are not niche irrelevant wins; they map to real workloads. Physics engines in scientific computing, prime number generation for cryptography or searches, and code paths that use specialized instructions all favor AMD. The 48 threads, 64 MB L3 cache, and six-channel memory bandwidth support these tasks at scale, even if the per-core clock speed is far lower.

The use-case split is clean: pick Intel for almost everything in desktop computing. The use-case split is clean: choose AMD when the workload is physics-heavy, prime-number bound, or dependent on extended instruction throughput, and when the platform needs the massive PCIe lane count and memory bandwidth that Intel cannot match.