Core i7-9700K vs EPYC 9375F

Intel

Core i7-9700K

8 Cores8 Thrd95 WWMax: 4.9 GHz2018

Popular choices:

VS
AMD

EPYC 9375F

32 Cores64 Thrd320 WWMax: 4.8 GHz2024

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

2018

Why buy it

  • Costs $4,921 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $5,306 MSRP).
  • Delivers 107.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.4 vs 18.0 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $5,306 MSRP).
  • Draws 95W instead of 320W, a 225W reduction.
  • Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while EPYC 9375F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

  • Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9375F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
  • Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 95,768).
  • Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9375F, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
  • Older platform position on LGA1151 with DDR4, while EPYC 9375F moves to SP5 and DDR5.

EPYC 9375F

2024

Why buy it

  • Better for gaming: +73.1% higher average FPS across 4 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 18.0 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($5,306 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
  • 236.8% higher power demand at 320W vs 95W.
  • No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9375F better than Core i7-9700K?
Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 9375F makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-9700K is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.
Which one is better for gaming?
If gaming is the priority, EPYC 9375F is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 73.1% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests. It also has a big cache advantage at 256 MB vs 12 MB.
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9375F is the better fit. You are getting 565.2% better PassMark, backed by 32 cores and 64 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 2033.3% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 12 MB).
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
EPYC 9375F is the smarter buy by a wide margin for a fresh build. EPYC 9375F is 1278.2% more expensive on MSRP at $5,306 MSRP versus $385 MSRP, and it gives you a 73.1% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i7-9700K only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that is mostly used-market pricing on an obsolete 2018 platform. Even with 107.2% better value on paper (37.4 vs 18.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a very cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA1151.
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
EPYC 9375F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2018), a healthier platform with SP5 and DDR5 instead of LGA1151, 3D V-Cache and a much larger 256 MB L3 cache instead of 12 MB, and more multi-core headroom with 32 cores / 64 threads instead of 8/8. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

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

Path of Exile 2

PresetCore i7-9700KEPYC 9375F
1080p
low308 FPS315 FPS
medium278 FPS290 FPS
high231 FPS240 FPS
ultra182 FPS204 FPS
1440p
low270 FPS278 FPS
medium221 FPS230 FPS
high178 FPS178 FPS
ultra143 FPS158 FPS
4K
low170 FPS191 FPS
medium140 FPS157 FPS
high108 FPS120 FPS
ultra95 FPS107 FPS
Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

PresetCore i7-9700KEPYC 9375F
1080p
low360 FPS725 FPS
medium321 FPS618 FPS
high291 FPS485 FPS
ultra259 FPS421 FPS
1440p
low324 FPS579 FPS
medium282 FPS510 FPS
high258 FPS419 FPS
ultra225 FPS341 FPS
4K
low249 FPS338 FPS
medium221 FPS300 FPS
high208 FPS270 FPS
ultra179 FPS239 FPS
League of Legends

League of Legends

PresetCore i7-9700KEPYC 9375F
1080p
low360 FPS923 FPS
medium360 FPS748 FPS
high360 FPS675 FPS
ultra360 FPS572 FPS
1440p
low360 FPS724 FPS
medium360 FPS584 FPS
high360 FPS515 FPS
ultra360 FPS433 FPS
4K
low360 FPS511 FPS
medium360 FPS421 FPS
high360 FPS374 FPS
ultra318 FPS309 FPS
Valorant

Valorant

PresetCore i7-9700KEPYC 9375F
1080p
low360 FPS1141 FPS
medium360 FPS1015 FPS
high360 FPS902 FPS
ultra360 FPS813 FPS
1440p
low360 FPS890 FPS
medium360 FPS784 FPS
high360 FPS688 FPS
ultra360 FPS600 FPS
4K
low360 FPS650 FPS
medium360 FPS579 FPS
high360 FPS515 FPS
ultra360 FPS437 FPS

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and EPYC 9375F

Intel

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.

AMD

EPYC 9375F

The EPYC 9375F is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 3.85 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 320 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 95,768 points. Launch price was $5,306.

Processing Power

The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the EPYC 9375F offers 32 cores / 64 threads — the EPYC 9375F has 24 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 4.8 GHz on the EPYC 9375F — a 2.1% clock advantage for the Core i7-9700K (base: 3.6 GHz vs 3.85 GHz). The Core i7-9700K uses the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the EPYC 9375F uses Turin (2024) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the EPYC 9375F's 95,768 — a 147.7% lead for the EPYC 9375F. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9375F.

FeatureCore i7-9700KEPYC 9375F
Cores / Threads
8 / 8
32 / 64+300%
Boost Clock
4.9 GHz+2%
4.8 GHz
Base Clock
3.6 GHz
3.85 GHz+7%
L3 Cache
12 MB (total)
256 MB (total)+2033%
L2 Cache
256K (per core)
1 MB (per core)+300%
Process
14 nm
4 nm-71%
Architecture
Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019)
Turin (2024)
PassMark
14,397
95,768+565%
Geekbench 6 Single
2,981
Geekbench 6 Multi
26,020
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the EPYC 9375F uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i7-9700K versus DDR5-6000 on the EPYC 9375F — the EPYC 9375F supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i7-9700K supports up to 128 GB of RAM compared to 6 TB 182.1% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i7-9700K) vs 12 (EPYC 9375F). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-9700K) vs 128 (EPYC 9375F) — the EPYC 9375F offers 112 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel 300 series (Core i7-9700K) and SP5 (EPYC 9375F).

FeatureCore i7-9700KEPYC 9375F
Socket
LGA1151
SP5
PCIe Generation
PCIe 3.0
PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed
DDR4-2666
DDR5-6000+25%
Max RAM Capacity
128 GB
6 TB+4700%
RAM Channels
2
12+500%
ECC Support
No
Yes
PCIe Lanes
16
128+700%
🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-9700K) vs AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9375F). The Core i7-9700K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the EPYC 9375F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop, EPYC 9375F targets Data Center / Frequency Optimized. Direct competitor: EPYC 9375F rivals Xeon 6766E.

FeatureCore i7-9700KEPYC 9375F
Integrated GPU
Yes
No
IGPU Model
UHD Graphics 630
Unlocked
Yes
AVX-512
No
Virtualization
VT-x, VT-d
AMD-V, SEV-SNP
Target Use
Desktop
Data Center / Frequency Optimized
💰

Value Analysis

The Core i7-9700K launched at $385 MSRP, while the EPYC 9375F debuted at $5306. On MSRP ($385 vs $5306), the Core i7-9700K is $4921 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-9700K delivers 37.4 pts/$ vs 18.0 pts/$ for the EPYC 9375F — making the Core i7-9700K the 69.8% better value option.

FeatureCore i7-9700KEPYC 9375F
MSRP
$385-93%
$5306
Performance per Dollar
37.4+108%
18.0
Release Date
2018
2024