EPYC 7301 vs i9-10900E
Aggregate performance score
Core i9-10900E outperforms EPYC 7301 by a significant 29% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 813 | 1012 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 10.50 | 1.35 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | no data | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | 18.08 | 5.36 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | Intel | no data |
| Architecture codename | Comet Lake (2020−2025) | Naples (2017−2018) |
| Release date | 30 April 2020 (5 years ago) | 29 June 2017 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $488 | $825 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
i9-10900E has 678% better value for money than EPYC 7301.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Core i9-10900E and EPYC 7301 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 10 (Deca-Core) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 20 | 32 |
| Base clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.7 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 22 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 20 MB (shared) | 64 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 206 mm2 | 192 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 4,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Core i9-10900E and EPYC 7301 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 2 (Multiprocessor) |
| Socket | 1200 | TR4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 170 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i9-10900E and EPYC 7301. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| TSX | + | - |
Security technologies
Core i9-10900E and EPYC 7301 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i9-10900E and EPYC 7301 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i9-10900E and EPYC 7301. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR4 Eight-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 2 TiB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 8 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 170.671 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel UHD Graphics 630 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i9-10900E and EPYC 7301.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 128 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 10.96 | 8.50 |
| Recency | 30 April 2020 | 29 June 2017 |
| Physical cores | 10 | 16 |
| Threads | 20 | 32 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 170 Watt |
i9-10900E has a 28.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and 161.5% lower power consumption.
EPYC 7301, on the other hand, has 60% more physical cores and 60% more threads.
The Intel Core i9-10900E is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD EPYC 7301 in performance tests.
Note that Core i9-10900E is a desktop processor while EPYC 7301 is a server/workstation one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
