Core i7-9700K
Popular choices:
EPYC 72F3
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
- ✅Draws 95W instead of 180W, a 85W reduction.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while EPYC 72F3 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 72F3 across 30 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 27,252).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 72F3, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $385 MSRP, while EPYC 72F3 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
EPYC 72F3
2021Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +17.0% higher average FPS across 30 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌89.5% higher power demand at 180W vs 95W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core i7-9700K
2018EPYC 72F3
2021Why buy it
- ✅Draws 95W instead of 180W, a 85W reduction.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while EPYC 72F3 needs a discrete GPU.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +17.0% higher average FPS across 30 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 72F3 across 30 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 27,252).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 72F3, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $385 MSRP, while EPYC 72F3 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Trade-offs
- ❌89.5% higher power demand at 180W vs 95W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 72F3 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 72F3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 308 FPS | 231 FPS |
| medium | 278 FPS | 184 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 149 FPS |
| ultra | 182 FPS | 107 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 270 FPS | 196 FPS |
| medium | 221 FPS | 151 FPS |
| high | 178 FPS | 117 FPS |
| ultra | 143 FPS | 86 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 170 FPS | 77 FPS |
| medium | 140 FPS | 63 FPS |
| high | 108 FPS | 49 FPS |
| ultra | 95 FPS | 40 FPS |
Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 72F3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 583 FPS |
| medium | 321 FPS | 510 FPS |
| high | 291 FPS | 412 FPS |
| ultra | 259 FPS | 360 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 324 FPS | 489 FPS |
| medium | 282 FPS | 436 FPS |
| high | 258 FPS | 362 FPS |
| ultra | 225 FPS | 300 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 249 FPS | 304 FPS |
| medium | 221 FPS | 274 FPS |
| high | 208 FPS | 245 FPS |
| ultra | 179 FPS | 220 FPS |
League of Legends
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 72F3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 681 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 681 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 681 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 681 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 681 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 597 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 534 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 466 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 485 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 387 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 343 FPS |
| ultra | 318 FPS | 277 FPS |
Valorant
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 72F3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 681 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 681 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 681 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 681 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 681 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 681 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 655 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 565 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 643 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 574 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 499 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 427 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and EPYC 72F3
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 72F3
EPYC 72F3
The EPYC 72F3 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 15 March 2021 (4 years ago). It is based on the Milan (2021−2023) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm+ process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 180 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 27,252 points. Launch price was $2,468.
Processing Power
The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, matching the EPYC 72F3's 8 cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 4.1 GHz on the EPYC 72F3 — a 17.8% clock advantage for the Core i7-9700K (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 72F3 uses Milan (2021−2023) (7 nm+). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the EPYC 72F3's 27,252 — a 61.7% lead for the EPYC 72F3. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 72F3.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 72F3 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 8 / 8 | 8 / 16 |
| Boost Clock | 4.9 GHz+20% | 4.1 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.6 GHz | 3.7 GHz+3% |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 256 MB (total)+2033% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 512 kB (per core)+100% |
| Process | 14 nm | 7 nm+-50% |
| Architecture | Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) | Milan (2021−2023) |
| PassMark | 14,397 | 27,252+89% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the EPYC 72F3 uses SP3 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 72F3 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1151 | SP3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 4.0+33% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-9700K) / not specified (EPYC 72F3). The Core i7-9700K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the EPYC 72F3 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 72F3 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | — |
| IGPU Model | UHD Graphics 630 | — |
| Unlocked | Yes | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | — |
| Target Use | Desktop | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Core i7-9700K and EPYC 72F3
