Core i9-12900F vs EPYC 7601

CPU

GPU

Core i9-12900F

16 Cores24 Thrd65 WWMax: 5.1 GHz2022

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 7601

32 Cores64 Thrd180 WWMax: 3.2 GHz2017

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i9-12900F

16 / 24

35,873

+2.3%

35,059

0.0%

Ryzen 7 5800HS

Ryzen 7 3800XT

Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS

Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX

Ryzen 9 8940HX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7970X

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 i9-12900F

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +147.0% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 65W instead of 180W, a 115W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of TR4 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (30 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7601, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
❌Launch MSRP is still $494 MSRP, while EPYC 7601 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

EPYC 7601

2017

Why buy it

✅+113.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 30 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-12900F across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (35,059 vs 35,873).
❌176.9% higher power demand at 180W vs 65W.
❌Older platform position on TR4 with DDR4, while Core i9-12900F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.

Core i9-12900F

2022

EPYC 7601

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +147.0% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 65W instead of 180W, a 115W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of TR4 and DDR4.

Why buy it

✅+113.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 30 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (30 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7601, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
❌Launch MSRP is still $494 MSRP, while EPYC 7601 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-12900F across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (35,059 vs 35,873).
❌176.9% higher power demand at 180W vs 65W.
❌Older platform position on TR4 with DDR4, while Core i9-12900F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i9-12900F better than EPYC 7601?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 7601 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i9-12900F 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, Core i9-12900F is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 147.0% more average FPS across 2 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i9-12900F is the better fit. You are getting 2.3% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 24 threads.

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

Core i9-12900F is the smarter buy today. Core i9-12900F is at an unclear MSRP at $494 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you a 147.0% average FPS lead across 2 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (72.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

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

Core i9-12900F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2022 vs 2017), a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of TR4, and more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 24 threads instead of 32/64. 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.

Core i9-12900F Benchmark Check

EPYC 7601 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i9-12900F	EPYC 7601
1080p
low	269 FPS	187 FPS
medium	259 FPS	165 FPS
high	214 FPS	132 FPS
ultra	184 FPS	105 FPS
1440p
low	230 FPS	153 FPS
medium	198 FPS	127 FPS
high	159 FPS	97 FPS
ultra	140 FPS	78 FPS
4K
low	159 FPS	71 FPS
medium	136 FPS	63 FPS
high	106 FPS	48 FPS
ultra	93 FPS	39 FPS

Open Core i9-12900F Open EPYC 7601

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i9-12900F	EPYC 7601
1080p
low	617 FPS	207 FPS
medium	526 FPS	188 FPS
high	441 FPS	160 FPS
ultra	399 FPS	131 FPS
1440p
low	533 FPS	178 FPS
medium	470 FPS	163 FPS
high	397 FPS	141 FPS
ultra	340 FPS	111 FPS
4K
low	311 FPS	112 FPS
medium	281 FPS	103 FPS
high	266 FPS	92 FPS
ultra	232 FPS	75 FPS

Open Core i9-12900F Open EPYC 7601

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i9-12900F	EPYC 7601
1080p
low	775 FPS	620 FPS
medium	619 FPS	518 FPS
high	545 FPS	466 FPS
ultra	462 FPS	399 FPS
1440p
low	692 FPS	517 FPS
medium	560 FPS	432 FPS
high	487 FPS	378 FPS
ultra	416 FPS	325 FPS
4K
low	498 FPS	383 FPS
medium	418 FPS	308 FPS
high	378 FPS	270 FPS
ultra	319 FPS	220 FPS

Open Core i9-12900F Open EPYC 7601

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i9-12900F	EPYC 7601
1080p
low	894 FPS	832 FPS
medium	809 FPS	759 FPS
high	696 FPS	652 FPS
ultra	626 FPS	565 FPS
1440p
low	765 FPS	666 FPS
medium	681 FPS	584 FPS
high	586 FPS	500 FPS
ultra	517 FPS	422 FPS
4K
low	524 FPS	474 FPS
medium	475 FPS	427 FPS
high	423 FPS	375 FPS
ultra	369 FPS	322 FPS

Open Core i9-12900F Open EPYC 7601

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i9-12900F and EPYC 7601

Core i9-12900F

The Core i9-12900F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 January 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture. It features 16 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 35,873 points. Launch price was $499.

EPYC 7601

The EPYC 7601 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 29 June 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Naples (2017−2018) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: TR4. Thermal design power (TDP): 180 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 35,059 points. Launch price was $4,200.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i9-12900F packs 16 cores / 24 threads, while the EPYC 7601 offers 32 cores / 64 threads — the EPYC 7601 has 16 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.1 GHz on the Core i9-12900F versus 3.2 GHz on the EPYC 7601 — a 45.8% clock advantage for the Core i9-12900F (base: 2.4 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The Core i9-12900F uses the Alder Lake-S (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 7601 uses Naples (2017−2018) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i9-12900F scores 35,873 against the EPYC 7601's 35,059 — a 2.3% lead for the Core i9-12900F. L3 cache: 30 MB (total) on the Core i9-12900F vs 64 MB (total) on the EPYC 7601.

Feature	Core i9-12900F	EPYC 7601
Cores / Threads	16 / 24	32 / 64+100%
Boost Clock	5.1 GHz+59%	3.2 GHz
Base Clock	2.4 GHz+9%	2.2 GHz
L3 Cache	30 MB (total)	64 MB (total)+113%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)+150%	512K (per core)
Process	Intel 7 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Alder Lake-S (2022)	Naples (2017−2018)
PassMark	35,873+2%	35,059

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i9-12900F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 7601 uses TR4 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 4800 on the Core i9-12900F versus 2666 on the EPYC 7601 — the Core i9-12900F supports 57.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7601 supports up to 2048 of RAM compared to 128 — 176.5% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i9-12900F) vs 8 (EPYC 7601). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i9-12900F) vs 128 (EPYC 7601) — the EPYC 7601 offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Z690,B660 (Core i9-12900F) and SP3 (EPYC 7601).

Feature	Core i9-12900F	EPYC 7601
Socket	LGA1700	TR4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	4800+80%	2666
Max RAM Capacity	128	2048+1500%
RAM Channels	2	8+300%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	128+540%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i9-12900F) vs AMD-V, SVM (EPYC 7601). Direct competitor: Core i9-12900F rivals Ryzen 9 5900X; EPYC 7601 rivals Xeon Platinum 8180.