
Core i7-9700K
Popular choices:

EPYC 7C13
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
- ✅Better for gaming: +4.5% higher average FPS across 29 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $1,615 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $2,000 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 95W instead of 225W, a 130W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while EPYC 7C13 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 76,363).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 256 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7C13, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 7C13
2021Why buy it
- ✅+430.4% higher PassMark.
- ✅+2033.3% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅700% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 29 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌419.5% HIGHER MSRP$2,000 MSRPvs$385 MSRP
- ❌136.8% higher power demand at 225W vs 95W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core i7-9700K
2018EPYC 7C13
2021Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +4.5% higher average FPS across 29 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $1,615 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $2,000 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 95W instead of 225W, a 130W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while EPYC 7C13 needs a discrete GPU.
Why buy it
- ✅+430.4% higher PassMark.
- ✅+2033.3% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅700% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 76,363).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 256 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7C13, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 29 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌419.5% HIGHER MSRP$2,000 MSRPvs$385 MSRP
- ❌136.8% higher power demand at 225W vs 95W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 7C13 better than Core i7-9700K?
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 7C13 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 308 FPS | 195 FPS |
| medium | 278 FPS | 159 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 129 FPS |
| ultra | 182 FPS | 100 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 270 FPS | 160 FPS |
| medium | 221 FPS | 125 FPS |
| high | 178 FPS | 97 FPS |
| ultra | 143 FPS | 77 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 170 FPS | 72 FPS |
| medium | 140 FPS | 60 FPS |
| high | 108 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 95 FPS | 39 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 7C13 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 267 FPS |
| medium | 321 FPS | 235 FPS |
| high | 291 FPS | 193 FPS |
| ultra | 259 FPS | 158 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 324 FPS | 219 FPS |
| medium | 282 FPS | 198 FPS |
| high | 258 FPS | 167 FPS |
| ultra | 225 FPS | 133 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 249 FPS | 135 FPS |
| medium | 221 FPS | 124 FPS |
| high | 208 FPS | 112 FPS |
| ultra | 179 FPS | 94 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 7C13 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 837 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 698 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 650 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 574 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 602 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 500 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 459 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 401 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 430 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 336 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 300 FPS |
| ultra | 318 FPS | 243 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 7C13 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 977 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 886 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 761 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 659 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 753 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 657 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 560 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 481 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 541 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 481 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 422 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 364 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and EPYC 7C13

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 7C13
EPYC 7C13
The EPYC 7C13 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2021-03-01. It is based on the Milan (2021−2023) architecture. It features 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 3.68 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 225 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 76,363 points. Launch price was $5,000.
Processing Power
The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the EPYC 7C13 offers 64 cores / 128 threads — the EPYC 7C13 has 56 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 3.68 GHz on the EPYC 7C13 — a 28.4% clock advantage for the Core i7-9700K (base: 3.6 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Core i7-9700K uses the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the EPYC 7C13 uses Milan (2021−2023) (7 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the EPYC 7C13's 76,363 — a 136.5% lead for the EPYC 7C13. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 7C13.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 7C13 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 8 / 8 | 64 / 128+700% |
| Boost Clock | 4.9 GHz+33% | 3.68 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.6 GHz+80% | 2 GHz |
| 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 | 76,363+430% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 1,538 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 37,000 |
Memory & Platform
The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the EPYC 7C13 uses SP3 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-2666 memory speed. The EPYC 7C13 supports up to 4096 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i7-9700K) vs 8 (EPYC 7C13). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-9700K) vs 128 (EPYC 7C13) — the EPYC 7C13 offers 112 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel 300 series (Core i7-9700K) and SP3 (EPYC 7C13).
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 7C13 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1151 | SP3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 4.0+33% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | DDR4-3200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | 4096 GB+3100% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 8+300% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 128+700% |
Advanced Features
Only the Core i7-9700K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-9700K) vs AMD-V (EPYC 7C13). The Core i7-9700K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the EPYC 7C13 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop, EPYC 7C13 targets Enterprise Server. Direct competitor: EPYC 7C13 rivals Xeon Platinum 8380.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 7C13 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | UHD Graphics 630 | None |
| Unlocked | Yes | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Desktop | Enterprise Server |
Value Analysis
The Core i7-9700K launched at $385 MSRP, while the EPYC 7C13 debuted at $2000. On MSRP ($385 vs $2000), the Core i7-9700K is $1615 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-9700K delivers 37.4 pts/$ vs 38.2 pts/$ for the EPYC 7C13 — making the EPYC 7C13 the 2.1% better value option.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 7C13 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $385-81% | $2000 |
| Performance per Dollar | 37.4 | 38.2+2% |
| Release Date | 2018 | 2021 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












