Core i9-10900E vs EPYC 7252

Core i9-10900E vs EPYC 7252 Performance Spectrum

Core i9-10900E

10 / 20

19,332

0.0%

Core i5-11300H

Core i7-3970X Extreme Edition

19,411

+0.4%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

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.

Core i9-10900E vs EPYC 7252 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i9-10900E vs EPYC 7252: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i9-10900E

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +11.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 65W instead of 120W, a 55W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while EPYC 7252 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (19,332 vs 19,411).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $488 MSRP, while EPYC 7252 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

EPYC 7252

2019

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.
✅+60% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 20 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-10900E across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌84.6% higher power demand at 120W vs 65W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i9-10900E can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i9-10900E better than EPYC 7252?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. EPYC 7252 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i9-10900E is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 7252 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 60% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 20 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core i9-10900E is the better buy right now. Core i9-10900E comes in at an unclear MSRP at $488 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 11.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that EPYC 7252 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.4% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (39.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i9-10900E makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2019). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i9-10900E vs EPYC 7252 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i9-10900E

The Core i9-10900E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 April 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture. It features 10 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 4.7 GHz. L3 cache: 20 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 19,332 points. Launch price was $488.

EPYC 7252

The EPYC 7252 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 August 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm, 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 120 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 19,411 points. Launch price was $475.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i9-10900E packs 10 cores / 20 threads, while the EPYC 7252 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Core i9-10900E has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.7 GHz on the Core i9-10900E versus 3.2 GHz on the EPYC 7252 — a 38% clock advantage for the Core i9-10900E (base: 2.8 GHz vs 3.1 GHz). The Core i9-10900E uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the EPYC 7252 uses Zen 2 (2017−2020) (7 nm, 14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i9-10900E scores 19,332 against the EPYC 7252's 19,411 — a 0.4% lead for the EPYC 7252. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i9-10900E vs 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 7252.

Feature	Core i9-10900E	EPYC 7252
Cores / Threads	10 / 20+25%	8 / 16
Boost Clock	4.7 GHz+47%	3.2 GHz
Base Clock	2.8 GHz	3.1 GHz+11%
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	32 MB (total)+60%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	512 kB (per core)+100%
Process	14 nm	7 nm, 14 nm-50%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Zen 2 (2017−2020)
PassMark	19,332	19,411

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i9-10900E uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the EPYC 7252 uses SP3 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i9-10900E	EPYC 7252
Socket	LGA1200	SP3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2933	—
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i9-10900E) / not specified (EPYC 7252). The Core i9-10900E includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the EPYC 7252 requires a dedicated GPU.