EPYC 7H12 vs i9-9900X

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i9-9900X
2018
10 cores / 20 threads, 165 Watt
13.76
EPYC 7H12
2019
64 cores / 128 threads, 280 Watt
43.84
+219%

EPYC 7H12 outperforms Core i9-9900X by a whopping 219% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i9-9900X and EPYC 7H12 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking53447
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.91no data
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
SeriesIntel Core i9AMD EPYC
Power efficiency7.8914.82
Architecture codenameSkylake (server) (2017−2018)Zen 2 (2017−2020)
Release date19 October 2018 (6 years ago)18 September 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$989no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core i9-9900X and EPYC 7H12 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 cores10 (Deca-Core)64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core)
Threads20128
Base clock speed3.5 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed4.5 GHz3.3 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier3526
L1 cache64 KB (per core)96K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache19.25 MB (shared)256 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm, 14 nm
Die sizeno data192 mm2
Maximum core temperature92 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on Core i9-9900X and EPYC 7H12 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)2 (Multiprocessor)
SocketFCLGA2066TR4
Power consumption (TDP)165 Watt280 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i9-9900X and EPYC 7H12. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512no data
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX+-
Turbo Boost Max 3.0+no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Core i9-9900X and EPYC 7H12 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i9-9900X and EPYC 7H12 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 i9-9900X and EPYC 7H12. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2666DDR4 Eight-channel
Maximum memory size128 GB4 TiB
Max memory channels48
Maximum memory bandwidth85.33 GB/s204.763 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/Ano data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i9-9900X and EPYC 7H12.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes44no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

i9-9900X 13.76
EPYC 7H12 43.84
+219%

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.

i9-9900X 21851
EPYC 7H12 69633
+219%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.76 43.84
Recency 19 October 2018 18 September 2019
Physical cores 10 64
Threads 20 128
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 165 Watt 280 Watt

i9-9900X has 69.7% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7H12, on the other hand, has a 218.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 months, 540% more physical cores and 540% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7H12 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i9-9900X in performance tests.

Note that Core i9-9900X is a desktop processor while EPYC 7H12 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i9-9900X and EPYC 7H12, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 i9-9900X
Core i9-9900X
AMD EPYC 7H12
EPYC 7H12

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

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


3.1 101 vote

Rate Core i9-9900X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 450 votes

Rate EPYC 7H12 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i9-9900X or EPYC 7H12, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.