Core i7-9700K vs EPYC 8324PN

CPU

GPU

Core i7-9700K

8 Cores8 Thrd95 WWMax: 4.9 GHz2018

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 8324PN

32 Cores64 Thrd130 WWMax: 3 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i7-9700K

8 / 8

14,397

+71.9%

8,375

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

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 i7-9700K

2018

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +84.6% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 95W instead of 130W, a 35W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while EPYC 8324PN needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 128 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 8324PN, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads.
❌Launch MSRP is still $385 MSRP, while EPYC 8324PN mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌Older platform position on LGA1151 with DDR4, while EPYC 8324PN moves to SP6 and DDR5.

EPYC 8324PN

2023

Why buy it

✅+966.7% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads.
✅Newer platform on SP6 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1151 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (8,375 vs 14,397).
❌36.8% higher power demand at 130W vs 95W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i7-9700K

2018

EPYC 8324PN

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +84.6% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 95W instead of 130W, a 35W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while EPYC 8324PN needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅+966.7% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads.
✅Newer platform on SP6 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1151 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 128 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 8324PN, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads.
❌Launch MSRP is still $385 MSRP, while EPYC 8324PN mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌Older platform position on LGA1151 with DDR4, while EPYC 8324PN moves to SP6 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (8,375 vs 14,397).
❌36.8% higher power demand at 130W vs 95W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-9700K better than EPYC 8324PN?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 8324PN makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-9700K is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i7-9700K is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 84.6% more average FPS across 3 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-9700K is the better fit. You are getting 71.9% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 8 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core i7-9700K is the smarter buy today. Core i7-9700K is at an unclear MSRP at $385 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you a 84.6% average FPS lead across 3 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (37.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

EPYC 8324PN is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2018), a healthier platform with SP6 and DDR5 instead of LGA1151, and 966.7% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 12 MB). That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

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.

Core i7-9700K Benchmark Check

EPYC 8324PN Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	EPYC 8324PN
1080p
low	308 FPS	159 FPS
medium	278 FPS	131 FPS
high	231 FPS	110 FPS
ultra	182 FPS	87 FPS
1440p
low	270 FPS	142 FPS
medium	221 FPS	114 FPS
high	178 FPS	90 FPS
ultra	143 FPS	72 FPS
4K
low	170 FPS	68 FPS
medium	140 FPS	58 FPS
high	108 FPS	45 FPS
ultra	95 FPS	37 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open EPYC 8324PN

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	EPYC 8324PN
1080p
low	360 FPS	209 FPS
medium	321 FPS	209 FPS
high	291 FPS	174 FPS
ultra	259 FPS	138 FPS
1440p
low	324 FPS	194 FPS
medium	282 FPS	176 FPS
high	258 FPS	150 FPS
ultra	225 FPS	116 FPS
4K
low	249 FPS	120 FPS
medium	221 FPS	111 FPS
high	208 FPS	97 FPS
ultra	179 FPS	79 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open EPYC 8324PN

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i7-9700K	EPYC 8324PN
1080p
low	360 FPS	209 FPS
medium	360 FPS	209 FPS
high	360 FPS	209 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	209 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	209 FPS
medium	360 FPS	209 FPS
high	360 FPS	209 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	209 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	209 FPS
medium	360 FPS	209 FPS
high	360 FPS	209 FPS
ultra	318 FPS	209 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open EPYC 8324PN

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i7-9700K	EPYC 8324PN
1080p
low	360 FPS	209 FPS
medium	360 FPS	209 FPS
high	360 FPS	209 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	209 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	209 FPS
medium	360 FPS	209 FPS
high	360 FPS	209 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	209 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	209 FPS
medium	360 FPS	209 FPS
high	360 FPS	209 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	209 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open EPYC 8324PN

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and EPYC 8324PN

Core i7-9700K

The Core i7-9700K is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 19 October 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 14,397 points. Launch price was $374.

EPYC 8324PN

The EPYC 8324PN is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 18 September 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Siena (2023−2024) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 2.05 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: SP6. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 8,375 points. Launch price was $2,125.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the EPYC 8324PN offers 32 cores / 64 threads — the EPYC 8324PN has 24 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 3 GHz on the EPYC 8324PN — a 48.1% clock advantage for the Core i7-9700K (base: 3.6 GHz vs 2.05 GHz). The Core i7-9700K uses the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the EPYC 8324PN uses Siena (2023−2024) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the EPYC 8324PN's 8,375 — a 52.9% lead for the Core i7-9700K. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 128 MB (total) on the EPYC 8324PN.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	EPYC 8324PN
Cores / Threads	8 / 8	32 / 64+300%
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz+63%	3 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+76%	2.05 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	128 MB (total)+967%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	1 MB (per core)+300%
Process	14 nm	5 nm-64%
Architecture	Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019)	Siena (2023−2024)
PassMark	14,397+72%	8,375

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the EPYC 8324PN uses SP6 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	EPYC 8324PN
Socket	LGA1151	SP6
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	—
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-9700K) / not specified (EPYC 8324PN). The Core i7-9700K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the EPYC 8324PN requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop.