Core i9-14900F
Popular choices:
EPYC 73F3
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.
Core i9-14900F
2024Why buy it
- ✅+1.6% higher PassMark.
- ✅Costs $2,997 less on MSRP ($524 MSRP vs $3,521 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 582.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 89.4 vs 13.1 PassMark/$ ($524 MSRP vs $3,521 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 240W, a 175W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 73F3 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 73F3, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 73F3
2021Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +9.0% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (46,103 vs 46,825).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 13.1 vs 89.4 PassMark/$ ($3,521 MSRP vs $524 MSRP).
- ❌269.2% higher power demand at 240W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core i9-14900F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
Core i9-14900F
2024EPYC 73F3
2021Why buy it
- ✅+1.6% higher PassMark.
- ✅Costs $2,997 less on MSRP ($524 MSRP vs $3,521 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 582.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 89.4 vs 13.1 PassMark/$ ($524 MSRP vs $3,521 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 240W, a 175W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +9.0% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 73F3 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 73F3, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (46,103 vs 46,825).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 13.1 vs 89.4 PassMark/$ ($3,521 MSRP vs $524 MSRP).
- ❌269.2% higher power demand at 240W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core i9-14900F moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i9-14900F better than EPYC 73F3?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core i9-14900F | EPYC 73F3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 318 FPS | 200 FPS |
| medium | 309 FPS | 159 FPS |
| high | 244 FPS | 128 FPS |
| ultra | 206 FPS | 98 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 276 FPS | 166 FPS |
| medium | 238 FPS | 128 FPS |
| high | 176 FPS | 99 FPS |
| ultra | 155 FPS | 78 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 190 FPS | 74 FPS |
| medium | 162 FPS | 61 FPS |
| high | 121 FPS | 48 FPS |
| ultra | 109 FPS | 39 FPS |
Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i9-14900F | EPYC 73F3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 497 FPS | 510 FPS |
| medium | 436 FPS | 446 FPS |
| high | 355 FPS | 357 FPS |
| ultra | 314 FPS | 290 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 422 FPS | 418 FPS |
| medium | 381 FPS | 375 FPS |
| high | 317 FPS | 309 FPS |
| ultra | 258 FPS | 244 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 236 FPS | 257 FPS |
| medium | 217 FPS | 235 FPS |
| high | 206 FPS | 206 FPS |
| ultra | 180 FPS | 171 FPS |
League of Legends
| Preset | Core i9-14900F | EPYC 73F3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 760 FPS | 979 FPS |
| medium | 624 FPS | 819 FPS |
| high | 541 FPS | 760 FPS |
| ultra | 465 FPS | 678 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 680 FPS | 675 FPS |
| medium | 567 FPS | 564 FPS |
| high | 485 FPS | 515 FPS |
| ultra | 424 FPS | 453 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 500 FPS | 482 FPS |
| medium | 439 FPS | 382 FPS |
| high | 391 FPS | 338 FPS |
| ultra | 334 FPS | 274 FPS |
Valorant
| Preset | Core i9-14900F | EPYC 73F3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 990 FPS | 1146 FPS |
| medium | 886 FPS | 1015 FPS |
| high | 774 FPS | 873 FPS |
| ultra | 688 FPS | 758 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 821 FPS | 842 FPS |
| medium | 723 FPS | 733 FPS |
| high | 631 FPS | 620 FPS |
| ultra | 555 FPS | 539 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 606 FPS | 608 FPS |
| medium | 543 FPS | 542 FPS |
| high | 480 FPS | 471 FPS |
| ultra | 421 FPS | 407 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i9-14900F and EPYC 73F3
Core i9-14900F
Core i9-14900F
The Core i9-14900F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 January 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-R (2023−2025) architecture. It features 24 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 5.6 GHz. L3 cache: 36 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-5600, DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 46,825 points. Launch price was $524.
EPYC 73F3
EPYC 73F3
The EPYC 73F3 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 15 March 2021 (4 years ago). It is based on the Milan (2021−2023) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm+ process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 240 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 46,103 points. Launch price was $3,521.
Processing Power
The Core i9-14900F packs 24 cores / 32 threads, while the EPYC 73F3 offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Core i9-14900F has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.6 GHz on the Core i9-14900F versus 4 GHz on the EPYC 73F3 — a 33.3% clock advantage for the Core i9-14900F (base: 2 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Core i9-14900F uses the Raptor Lake-R (2023−2025) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the EPYC 73F3 uses Milan (2021−2023) (7 nm+). In PassMark, the Core i9-14900F scores 46,825 against the EPYC 73F3's 46,103 — a 1.6% lead for the Core i9-14900F. L3 cache: 36 MB (total) on the Core i9-14900F vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 73F3.
| Feature | Core i9-14900F | EPYC 73F3 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 24 / 32+50% | 16 / 32 |
| Boost Clock | 5.6 GHz+40% | 4 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2 GHz | 3.5 GHz+75% |
| L3 Cache | 36 MB (total) | 256 MB (total)+611% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core)+300% | 512 kB (per core) |
| Process | Intel 7 nm | 7 nm+ |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-R (2023−2025) | Milan (2021−2023) |
| PassMark | 46,825+2% | 46,103 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 33,820 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Core i9-14900F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 73F3 uses SP3 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-5600 on the Core i9-14900F versus 3200 on the EPYC 73F3 — the EPYC 73F3 supports 199.4% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 73F3 supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 192 GB — 182.1% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i9-14900F) vs 8 (EPYC 73F3). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i9-14900F) vs 128 (EPYC 73F3) — the EPYC 73F3 offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: LGA1700 (Core i9-14900F) and SP3,C621A (EPYC 73F3).
| Feature | Core i9-14900F | EPYC 73F3 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1700 | SP3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-5600 | 3200+63900% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB+4915100% | 4096 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 8+300% |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 128+540% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. Direct competitor: EPYC 73F3 rivals Xeon Platinum 8362.
| Feature | Core i9-14900F | EPYC 73F3 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | — | None |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | Yes | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d |
Value Analysis
The Core i9-14900F launched at $524 MSRP, while the EPYC 73F3 debuted at $3521. On MSRP ($524 vs $3521), the Core i9-14900F is $2997 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i9-14900F delivers 89.4 pts/$ vs 13.1 pts/$ for the EPYC 73F3 — making the Core i9-14900F the 148.9% better value option.
| Feature | Core i9-14900F | EPYC 73F3 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $524-85% | $3521 |
| Performance per Dollar | 89.4+582% | 13.1 |
| Release Date | 2024 | 2021 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Core i9-14900F and EPYC 73F3
