i9-13900F vs EPYC 7272

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7272
2019
12 cores / 24 threads, 120 Watt
16.58
Core i9-13900F
2023
24 cores / 32 threads, 65 Watt
33.09
+99.6%

Core i9-13900F outperforms EPYC 7272 by a whopping 100% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7272 and Core i9-13900F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking402121
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation12.8957.05
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesAMD EPYCno data
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2017−2020)Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)
Release date7 August 2019 (5 years ago)4 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$625$524

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

i9-13900F has 343% better value for money than EPYC 7272.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7272 and Core i9-13900F 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 cores12 (Dodeca-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads2432
Base clock speed2.9 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz5.5 GHz
Multiplier29no data
L1 cache96 KB (per core)80K (per core)
L2 cache512 KB (per core)2 MB (per core)
L3 cache64 MB (shared)36 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm, 14 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size192 mm2257 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
Number of transistors3,800 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7272 and Core i9-13900F 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 configuration2 (Multiprocessor)1
SocketSP3FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7272 and Core i9-13900F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSX-+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Statusno dataLaunched
Precision Boost 2+no data
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

EPYC 7272 and Core i9-13900F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7272 and Core i9-13900F are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7272 and Core i9-13900F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Eight-channelDDR5-5600, DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size4 TiB192 GB
Max memory channels82
Maximum memory bandwidth204.763 GB/s89.6 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 EPYC 7272 and Core i9-13900F.

PCIe version4.05.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanes12820

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.

EPYC 7272 16.58
i9-13900F 33.09
+99.6%

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.

EPYC 7272 25568
i9-13900F 51020
+99.5%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.58 33.09
Recency 7 August 2019 4 January 2023
Physical cores 12 24
Threads 24 32
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 65 Watt

i9-13900F has a 99.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 100% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, and 84.6% lower power consumption.

The Core i9-13900F is our recommended choice as it beats the EPYC 7272 in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 7272 is a server/workstation processor while Core i9-13900F is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7272 and Core i9-13900F, 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.


AMD EPYC 7272
EPYC 7272
Intel Core i9-13900F
Core i9-13900F

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.


3.2 21 vote

Rate EPYC 7272 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 116 votes

Rate Core i9-13900F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7272 or Core i9-13900F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.