
Core i7-9700K
Popular choices:

EPYC 9354P
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 $2,345 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $2,730 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 36.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.4 vs 27.4 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $2,730 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 95W instead of 280W, a 185W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while EPYC 9354P needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9354P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 74,808).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9354P, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1151 with DDR4, while EPYC 9354P moves to SP5 and DDR5.
EPYC 9354P
2022Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +5.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1151 and DDR4.
- ✅700% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 27.4 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($2,730 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
- ❌194.7% higher power demand at 280W vs 95W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core i7-9700K
2018EPYC 9354P
2022Why buy it
- ✅Costs $2,345 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $2,730 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 36.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.4 vs 27.4 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $2,730 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 95W instead of 280W, a 185W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while EPYC 9354P needs a discrete GPU.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +5.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1151 and DDR4.
- ✅700% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9354P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 74,808).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9354P, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1151 with DDR4, while EPYC 9354P moves to SP5 and DDR5.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 27.4 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($2,730 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
- ❌194.7% higher power demand at 280W vs 95W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 9354P 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 9354P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 308 FPS | 176 FPS |
| medium | 278 FPS | 145 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 125 FPS |
| ultra | 182 FPS | 96 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 270 FPS | 153 FPS |
| medium | 221 FPS | 123 FPS |
| high | 178 FPS | 99 FPS |
| ultra | 143 FPS | 77 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 170 FPS | 71 FPS |
| medium | 140 FPS | 60 FPS |
| high | 108 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 95 FPS | 39 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 9354P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 534 FPS |
| medium | 321 FPS | 466 FPS |
| high | 291 FPS | 374 FPS |
| ultra | 259 FPS | 304 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 324 FPS | 439 FPS |
| medium | 282 FPS | 392 FPS |
| high | 258 FPS | 324 FPS |
| ultra | 225 FPS | 255 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 249 FPS | 270 FPS |
| medium | 221 FPS | 246 FPS |
| high | 208 FPS | 216 FPS |
| ultra | 179 FPS | 179 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 9354P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 673 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 562 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 523 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 455 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 511 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 426 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 390 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 337 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 377 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 295 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 263 FPS |
| ultra | 318 FPS | 211 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 9354P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 937 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 856 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 735 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 648 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 751 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 658 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 561 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 480 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 539 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 484 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 423 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 366 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and EPYC 9354P

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 9354P
EPYC 9354P
The EPYC 9354P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 November 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 3.25 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm, 6 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 280 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 74,808 points. Launch price was $2,730.
Processing Power
The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the EPYC 9354P offers 32 cores / 64 threads — the EPYC 9354P has 24 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 3.8 GHz on the EPYC 9354P — a 25.3% clock advantage for the Core i7-9700K (base: 3.6 GHz vs 3.25 GHz). The Core i7-9700K uses the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the EPYC 9354P uses Genoa (2022−2023) (5 nm, 6 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the EPYC 9354P's 74,808 — a 135.4% lead for the EPYC 9354P. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9354P.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 9354P |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 8 / 8 | 32 / 64+300% |
| Boost Clock | 4.9 GHz+29% | 3.8 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.6 GHz+11% | 3.25 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 256 MB (total)+2033% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 1 MB (per core)+300% |
| Process | 14 nm | 5 nm, 6 nm-64% |
| Architecture | Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) | Genoa (2022−2023) |
| PassMark | 14,397 | 74,808+420% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the EPYC 9354P uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i7-9700K versus 4800 on the EPYC 9354P — the EPYC 9354P supports 199.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9354P supports up to 6144 of RAM compared to 128 GB — 191.8% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i7-9700K) vs 12 (EPYC 9354P). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-9700K) vs 128 (EPYC 9354P) — the EPYC 9354P offers 112 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel 300 series (Core i7-9700K) and SP5 (EPYC 9354P).
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 9354P |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1151 | SP5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 5.0+67% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | 4800+119900% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB+2184433% | 6144 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 12+500% |
| 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. Only the EPYC 9354P 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, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9354P). The Core i7-9700K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the EPYC 9354P requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop. Direct competitor: EPYC 9354P rivals Xeon Platinum 8468.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 9354P |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | UHD Graphics 630 | None |
| Unlocked | Yes | No |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d, SEV-SNP |
| Target Use | Desktop | — |
Value Analysis
The Core i7-9700K launched at $385 MSRP, while the EPYC 9354P debuted at $2730. On MSRP ($385 vs $2730), the Core i7-9700K is $2345 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-9700K delivers 37.4 pts/$ vs 27.4 pts/$ for the EPYC 9354P — making the Core i7-9700K the 30.8% better value option.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | EPYC 9354P |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $385-86% | $2730 |
| Performance per Dollar | 37.4+36% | 27.4 |
| Release Date | 2018 | 2022 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












