EPYC 9455 vs i9-14900F

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i9-14900F
2024, $524
24 cores / 32 threads, 65 Watt
26.67
EPYC 9455
2024, $5,412
48 cores / 96 threads, 300 Watt
63.58
+138%

EPYC 9455 outperforms Core i9-14900F by a whopping 138% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking23626
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation52.149.36
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Power efficiency17.338.95
DesignerIntelAMD
ManufacturerIntelTSMC
Architecture codenameRaptor Lake-R (2023−2025)Turin (2024)
Release date8 January 2024 (2 years ago)10 October 2024 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$524$5,412

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

i9-14900F has 457% better value for money than EPYC 9455.

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

Core i9-14900F and EPYC 9455 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 cores24 (Tetracosa-Core)48 (Octatetraconta-Core)
Performance-cores8no data
Efficient-cores16no data
Threads3296
Base clock speed2 GHz3.15 GHz
Boost clock speed5.6 GHz4.4 GHz
L1 cache80 KB (per core)80 KB (per core)
L2 cache2 MB (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache36 MB (shared)192 MB (shared)
Chip lithographyIntel 7 nm4 nm
Die size257 mm26x 70.6 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data49,890 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data

Compatibility

Information on Core i9-14900F and EPYC 9455 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 configuration12
SocketFCLGA1700SP5
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt300 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i9-14900F and EPYC 9455. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2no data
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Speed Shift+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX+-
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Turbo Boost Max 3.0+no data
Precision Boost 2no data+
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Core i9-14900F and EPYC 9455 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
OS Guard+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i9-14900F and EPYC 9455 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i9-14900F and EPYC 9455. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR5-5600, DDR4-3200DDR5
Maximum memory size192 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth89.6 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/AN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i9-14900F and EPYC 9455.

PCIe version5.0 and 4.05.0
PCI Express lanes20128

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.

i9-14900F 26.67
EPYC 9455 63.58
+138%

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.

i9-14900F 46726
Samples: 548
EPYC 9455 111385
+138%
Samples: 3

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 26.67 63.58
Recency 8 January 2024 10 October 2024
Physical cores 24 48
Threads 32 96
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 300 Watt

i9-14900F has 361.5% lower power consumption.

EPYC 9455, on the other hand, has a 138.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 months, and 100% more physical cores and 200% more threads.

The AMD EPYC 9455 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Core i9-14900F in performance tests.

Note that Core i9-14900F is a desktop processor while EPYC 9455 is a server/workstation one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Core i9-14900F
Core i9-14900F
AMD EPYC 9455
EPYC 9455

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.7 157 votes

Rate Core i9-14900F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 9455 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors Core i9-14900F and EPYC 9455, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.