Core Ultra 9 288V vs EPYC 8024P

Core Ultra 9 288V vs EPYC 8024P Performance Spectrum

Core Ultra 9 288V

8 / 8

20,280

0.0%

20,455

+0.9%

Ryzen Threadripper 3960X

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 Ultra 9 288V vs EPYC 8024P 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 Ultra 9 288V vs EPYC 8024P: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core Ultra 9 288V

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +17.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 30W instead of 90W, a 60W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc 140V, while EPYC 8024P needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (20,280 vs 20,455).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 8024P, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads.
❌Launch MSRP is still $600 MSRP, while EPYC 8024P mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

EPYC 8024P

2023

Why buy it

✅+0.9% higher PassMark.
✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 9 288V across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌200% higher power demand at 90W vs 30W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 9 288V can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 9 288V better than EPYC 8024P?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. EPYC 8024P makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core Ultra 9 288V 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 8024P is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.9% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 166.7% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 12 MB).

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

Core Ultra 9 288V is the better buy right now. Core Ultra 9 288V comes in at an unclear MSRP at $600 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 17.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that EPYC 8024P is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.9% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (33.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 Ultra 9 288V makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2023). That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Core Ultra 9 288V vs EPYC 8024P Technical Specifications

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

Core Ultra 9 288V

The Core Ultra 9 288V is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 September 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Lunar Lake (2024) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 2.5 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2833. Thermal design power (TDP): 30 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 20,280 points. Launch price was $299.

EPYC 8024P

The EPYC 8024P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 18 September 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Siena (2023−2024) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: SP6. Thermal design power (TDP): 90 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 20,455 points. Launch price was $409.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 9 288V packs 8 cores / 8 threads, matching the EPYC 8024P's 8 cores. Boost clocks reach 5.1 GHz on the Core Ultra 9 288V versus 3 GHz on the EPYC 8024P — a 51.9% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 9 288V (base: 3.3 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Core Ultra 9 288V uses the Lunar Lake (2024) architecture (3 nm), while the EPYC 8024P uses Siena (2023−2024) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 9 288V scores 20,280 against the EPYC 8024P's 20,455 — a 0.9% lead for the EPYC 8024P. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 9 288V vs 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 8024P.

Feature	Core Ultra 9 288V	EPYC 8024P
Cores / Threads	8 / 8	8 / 16
Boost Clock	5.1 GHz+70%	3 GHz
Base Clock	3.3 GHz+38%	2.4 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	32 MB (total)+167%
L2 Cache	2.5 MB (per core)+150%	1 MB (per core)
Process	3 nm-40%	5 nm
Architecture	Lunar Lake (2024)	Siena (2023−2024)
PassMark	20,280	20,455
Cinebench R23 Multi	9,300	—
Geekbench 6 Single	2,800	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	10,000	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 9 288V uses the FCBGA2833 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 8024P uses SP6 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core Ultra 9 288V	EPYC 8024P
Socket	FCBGA2833	SP6
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	LPDDR5X-8533	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	8	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (Core Ultra 9 288V) / not specified (EPYC 8024P). The Core Ultra 9 288V includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc 140V), while the EPYC 8024P requires a dedicated GPU.