Core i9-14900F
EPYC 7402
Core i9-14900F vs EPYC 7402 Performance Spectrum
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 i9-14900F vs EPYC 7402 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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Core i9-14900F vs EPYC 7402: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
Core i9-14900F
2024Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +28.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $1,259 less on MSRP ($524 MSRP vs $1,783 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 246.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 89.4 vs 25.8 PassMark/$ ($524 MSRP vs $1,783 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 180W, a 115W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7402, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 7402
2019Why buy it
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-14900F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (28,546 vs 33,820).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 25.8 vs 89.4 PassMark/$ ($1,783 MSRP vs $524 MSRP).
- ❌176.9% higher power demand at 180W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core i9-14900F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i9-14900F better than EPYC 7402?
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?
Core i9-14900F vs EPYC 7402 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
Core i9-14900F
The Core i9-14900F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 January 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-R (2023−2025) architecture. It features 24 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 5.6 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): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-5600, DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 46,825 points. Launch price was $524.
EPYC 7402
The EPYC 7402 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 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.35 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): 180 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 46,012 points. Launch price was $1,783.
Processing Power
The Core i9-14900F packs 24 cores / 32 threads, matching the EPYC 7402's 24 cores. Boost clocks reach 5.6 GHz on the Core i9-14900F versus 3.35 GHz on the EPYC 7402 — a 50.3% clock advantage for the Core i9-14900F (base: 2 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The Core i9-14900F uses the Raptor Lake-R (2023−2025) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 7402 uses Zen 2 (2017−2020) (7 nm, 14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i9-14900F scores 46,825 against the EPYC 7402's 46,012 — a 1.8% lead for the Core i9-14900F. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 33,820 vs 28,546 (16.9% advantage for the Core i9-14900F). L3 cache: 36 MB (total) on the Core i9-14900F vs 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 7402.
| Feature | Core i9-14900F | EPYC 7402 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 24 / 32 | 24 / 48 |
| Boost Clock | 5.6 GHz+67% | 3.35 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2 GHz | 2.8 GHz+40% |
| L3 Cache | 36 MB (total)+13% | 32 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core)+300% | 512 kB (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 7 nm, 14 nm |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-R (2023−2025) | Zen 2 (2017−2020) |
| PassMark | 46,825+2% | 46,012 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 33,820+18% | 28,546 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 1,299 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 12,622 |
Memory & Platform
The Core i9-14900F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 7402 uses SP3 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-5600 on the Core i9-14900F versus DDR4-3200 on the EPYC 7402 — the Core i9-14900F supports 75% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7402 supports up to 4096 GB of RAM compared to 192 GB — 2033.3% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i9-14900F) vs 8 (EPYC 7402). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i9-14900F) vs 128 (EPYC 7402) — the EPYC 7402 offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: LGA1700 (Core i9-14900F) and SP3,Rome (EPYC 7402).
| Feature | Core i9-14900F | EPYC 7402 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | SP3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-5600+75% | DDR4-3200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB | 4096 GB+2033% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 8+300% |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 128+540% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the Core i9-14900F supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i9-14900F) vs AMD-V, SEV, IOMMU (EPYC 7402). Primary use case: EPYC 7402 targets Server / Workstation. Direct competitor: EPYC 7402 rivals Xeon Gold 6242.
| Feature | Core i9-14900F | EPYC 7402 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | Yes | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | AMD-V, SEV, IOMMU |
| Target Use | — | Server / Workstation |
Value Analysis
At launch, the Core i9-14900F was priced at $524, while the EPYC 7402 came in at $1783. On launch pricing ($524 vs $1783), Core i9-14900F was $1259 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i9-14900F delivers 89.4 pts/$ vs 25.8 pts/$ for the EPYC 7402 — making the Core i9-14900F the 110.4% better value option.
| Feature | Core i9-14900F | EPYC 7402 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $524-71% | $1783 |
| Performance per Dollar | 89.4+247% | 25.8 |
| Release Date | 2024 | 2019 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Core i9-14900F and EPYC 7402
