
Core i7-9700K
Popular choices:

EPYC 4464P
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
About PassMark
PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.
Core i7-9700K
2018Why buy it
- ✅Costs $44 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $429 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4464P across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 47,185).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 32 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 4464P, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads and 28 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 37.4 vs 110.0 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $429 MSRP).
EPYC 4464P
2024Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +19.4% higher average FPS across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads, plus 28 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅Delivers 194.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 110.0 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($429 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
- ✅Newer platform on AM5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1151 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌11.4% HIGHER MSRP$429 MSRPvs$385 MSRP
Core i7-9700K
2018EPYC 4464P
2024Why buy it
- ✅Costs $44 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $429 MSRP).
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +19.4% higher average FPS across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads, plus 28 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅Delivers 194.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 110.0 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($429 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
- ✅Newer platform on AM5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1151 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4464P across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 47,185).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 32 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 4464P, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads and 28 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 37.4 vs 110.0 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $429 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌11.4% HIGHER MSRP$429 MSRPvs$385 MSRP
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 4464P better than Core i7-9700K?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 4464P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 308 FPS | 252 FPS |
| medium | 278 FPS | 231 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 200 FPS |
| ultra | 182 FPS | 172 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 270 FPS | 222 FPS |
| medium | 221 FPS | 183 FPS |
| high | 178 FPS | 153 FPS |
| ultra | 143 FPS | 135 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 170 FPS | 154 FPS |
| medium | 140 FPS | 127 FPS |
| high | 108 FPS | 100 FPS |
| ultra | 95 FPS | 86 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 4464P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 585 FPS |
| medium | 321 FPS | 493 FPS |
| high | 291 FPS | 385 FPS |
| ultra | 259 FPS | 341 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 324 FPS | 503 FPS |
| medium | 282 FPS | 444 FPS |
| high | 258 FPS | 352 FPS |
| ultra | 225 FPS | 294 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 249 FPS | 297 FPS |
| medium | 221 FPS | 268 FPS |
| high | 208 FPS | 238 FPS |
| ultra | 179 FPS | 204 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 4464P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 1025 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 1114 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 1037 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 875 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 938 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 832 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 751 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 650 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 573 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 492 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 442 FPS |
| ultra | 318 FPS | 373 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 4464P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 1180 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 1015 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 942 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 828 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 1000 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 873 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 748 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 634 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 678 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 594 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 525 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 437 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and EPYC 4464P

Core i7-9700K
Core i7-9700K
The Core i7-9700K is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 19 October 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 14,397 points. Launch price was $374.

EPYC 4464P
EPYC 4464P
The EPYC 4464P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 21 May 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Raphael (2023−2025) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: AM5. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 47,185 points. Launch price was $399.
Processing Power
The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the EPYC 4464P offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the EPYC 4464P has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 5.4 GHz on the EPYC 4464P — a 9.7% clock advantage for the EPYC 4464P (base: 3.6 GHz vs 3.7 GHz). The Core i7-9700K uses the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the EPYC 4464P uses Raphael (2023−2025) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the EPYC 4464P's 47,185 — a 106.5% lead for the EPYC 4464P. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 4464P.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 4464P |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 8 / 8 | 12 / 24+50% |
| Boost Clock | 4.9 GHz | 5.4 GHz+10% |
| Base Clock | 3.6 GHz | 3.7 GHz+3% |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 32 MB (total)+167% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 1 MB (per core)+300% |
| Process | 14 nm | 5 nm-64% |
| Architecture | Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) | Raphael (2023−2025) |
| PassMark | 14,397 | 47,185+228% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the EPYC 4464P uses AM5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i7-9700K versus 5200 on the EPYC 4464P — the EPYC 4464P supports 199.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 128 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-9700K) vs 28 (EPYC 4464P) — the EPYC 4464P offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel 300 series (Core i7-9700K) and AM5,FL1 (EPYC 4464P).
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 4464P |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1151 | AM5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 4.0+33% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | 5200+129900% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB+104857500% | 128 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 28+75% |
Advanced Features
Both processors feature an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Only the EPYC 4464P supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-9700K) vs VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V (EPYC 4464P). Both include integrated graphics — UHD Graphics 630 (Core i7-9700K) and AMD Radeon Graphics (EPYC 4464P) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop. Direct competitor: EPYC 4464P rivals Core i9-13900.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 4464P |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | UHD Graphics 630 | AMD Radeon Graphics |
| Unlocked | Yes | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V |
| Target Use | Desktop | — |
Value Analysis
The Core i7-9700K launched at $385 MSRP, while the EPYC 4464P debuted at $429. On MSRP ($385 vs $429), the Core i7-9700K is $44 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-9700K delivers 37.4 pts/$ vs 110.0 pts/$ for the EPYC 4464P — making the EPYC 4464P the 98.5% better value option.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 4464P |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $385-10% | $429 |
| Performance per Dollar | 37.4 | 110.0+194% |
| Release Date | 2018 | 2024 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












