Core i9-13900T vs EPYC 7F52

CPU

GPU

Core i9-13900T

24 Cores32 Thrd35 WWMax: 5.3 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 7F52

16 Cores32 Thrd240 WWMax: 3.9 GHz2020

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i9-13900T

24 / 32

42,735

+3.3%

41,388

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

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 i9-13900T

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +18.8% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $2,551 less on MSRP ($549 MSRP vs $3,100 MSRP).
✅Delivers 483.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 77.8 vs 13.4 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $3,100 MSRP).
✅Draws 35W instead of 240W, a 205W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (36 MB vs 256 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7F52, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

EPYC 7F52

2020

Why buy it

✅+611.1% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 36 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 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 i9-13900T across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (41,388 vs 42,735).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 13.4 vs 77.8 PassMark/$ ($3,100 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
❌585.7% higher power demand at 240W vs 35W.
❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core i9-13900T moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.

Core i9-13900T

2023

EPYC 7F52

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +18.8% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $2,551 less on MSRP ($549 MSRP vs $3,100 MSRP).
✅Delivers 483.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 77.8 vs 13.4 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $3,100 MSRP).
✅Draws 35W instead of 240W, a 205W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.

Why buy it

✅+611.1% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 36 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 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 (36 MB vs 256 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7F52, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-13900T across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (41,388 vs 42,735).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 13.4 vs 77.8 PassMark/$ ($3,100 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
❌585.7% higher power demand at 240W vs 35W.
❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core i9-13900T moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i9-13900T better than EPYC 7F52?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 7F52 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i9-13900T 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 i9-13900T is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 18.8% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i9-13900T is the better fit. You are getting 3.3% better PassMark, backed by 24 cores and 32 threads.

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

Core i9-13900T is the smarter buy today. Core i9-13900T is $2,551 cheaper on MSRP at $549 MSRP versus $3,100 MSRP, and it gives you a 18.8% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 483.0% better value on MSRP (77.8 vs 13.4 PassMark/$), 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 i9-13900T is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2020), a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of SP3, and more multi-core headroom with 24 cores / 32 threads instead of 16/32. 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 i9-13900T Benchmark Check

EPYC 7F52 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i9-13900T	EPYC 7F52
1080p
low	321 FPS	171 FPS
medium	311 FPS	138 FPS
high	247 FPS	117 FPS
ultra	209 FPS	92 FPS
1440p
low	278 FPS	152 FPS
medium	240 FPS	121 FPS
high	178 FPS	97 FPS
ultra	158 FPS	77 FPS
4K
low	192 FPS	71 FPS
medium	164 FPS	59 FPS
high	123 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	112 FPS	39 FPS

Open Core i9-13900T Open EPYC 7F52

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i9-13900T	EPYC 7F52
1080p
low	401 FPS	460 FPS
medium	350 FPS	406 FPS
high	286 FPS	311 FPS
ultra	252 FPS	249 FPS
1440p
low	341 FPS	376 FPS
medium	306 FPS	340 FPS
high	255 FPS	270 FPS
ultra	207 FPS	210 FPS
4K
low	191 FPS	234 FPS
medium	174 FPS	215 FPS
high	166 FPS	182 FPS
ultra	145 FPS	148 FPS

Open Core i9-13900T Open EPYC 7F52

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i9-13900T	EPYC 7F52
1080p
low	761 FPS	596 FPS
medium	625 FPS	488 FPS
high	542 FPS	445 FPS
ultra	466 FPS	380 FPS
1440p
low	677 FPS	502 FPS
medium	565 FPS	416 FPS
high	483 FPS	380 FPS
ultra	421 FPS	327 FPS
4K
low	495 FPS	376 FPS
medium	428 FPS	293 FPS
high	381 FPS	261 FPS
ultra	328 FPS	209 FPS

Open Core i9-13900T Open EPYC 7F52

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i9-13900T	EPYC 7F52
1080p
low	1004 FPS	938 FPS
medium	897 FPS	860 FPS
high	785 FPS	734 FPS
ultra	698 FPS	647 FPS
1440p
low	833 FPS	731 FPS
medium	733 FPS	647 FPS
high	640 FPS	549 FPS
ultra	562 FPS	469 FPS
4K
low	615 FPS	525 FPS
medium	550 FPS	476 FPS
high	487 FPS	415 FPS
ultra	426 FPS	358 FPS

Open Core i9-13900T Open EPYC 7F52

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i9-13900T and EPYC 7F52

Core i9-13900T

The Core i9-13900T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 January 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture. It features 24 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 5.3 GHz. L3 cache: 36 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-5600, DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 42,735 points. Launch price was $549.

EPYC 7F52

The EPYC 7F52 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 14 April 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm, 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 240 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 41,388 points. Launch price was $3,100.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i9-13900T packs 24 cores / 32 threads, while the EPYC 7F52 offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Core i9-13900T has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.3 GHz on the Core i9-13900T versus 3.9 GHz on the EPYC 7F52 — a 30.4% clock advantage for the Core i9-13900T (base: 1.1 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Core i9-13900T uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 7F52 uses Zen 2 (2017−2020) (7 nm, 14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i9-13900T scores 42,735 against the EPYC 7F52's 41,388 — a 3.2% lead for the Core i9-13900T. L3 cache: 36 MB (total) on the Core i9-13900T vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 7F52.

Feature	Core i9-13900T	EPYC 7F52
Cores / Threads	24 / 32+50%	16 / 32
Boost Clock	5.3 GHz+36%	3.9 GHz
Base Clock	1.1 GHz	3.5 GHz+218%
L3 Cache	36 MB (total)	256 MB (total)+611%
L2 Cache	2 MB (per core)+300%	512 kB (per core)
Process	Intel 7 nm	7 nm, 14 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Zen 2 (2017−2020)
PassMark	42,735+3%	41,388

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i9-13900T uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 7F52 uses SP3 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 5600 on the Core i9-13900T versus 3200 on the EPYC 7F52 — the Core i9-13900T supports 54.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7F52 supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 192 — 182.1% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i9-13900T) vs 8 (EPYC 7F52). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i9-13900T) vs 128 (EPYC 7F52) — the EPYC 7F52 offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Raptor Lake-HX (Core i9-13900T) and SP3 (EPYC 7F52).

Feature	Core i9-13900T	EPYC 7F52
Socket	LGA1700	SP3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	5600+75%	3200
Max RAM Capacity	192	4096+2033%
RAM Channels	2	8+300%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	128+540%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core i9-13900T has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i9-13900T) vs VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V (EPYC 7F52). The Core i9-13900T includes integrated graphics (Intel UHD Graphics), while the EPYC 7F52 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Core i9-13900T rivals Ryzen 9 7945HX; EPYC 7F52 rivals Xeon Gold 6248.

Feature	Core i9-13900T	EPYC 7F52
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Intel UHD Graphics	None
Unlocked	Yes	No
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i9-13900T launched at $549 MSRP, while the EPYC 7F52 debuted at $3100. On MSRP ($549 vs $3100), the Core i9-13900T is $2551 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i9-13900T delivers 77.8 pts/$ vs 13.4 pts/$ for the EPYC 7F52 — making the Core i9-13900T the 141.4% better value option.