EPYC 7443 vs i9-10980XE

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i9-10980XE
2019
18 cores / 36 threads, 165 Watt
20.57
EPYC 7443
2021
24 cores / 48 threads, 200 Watt
35.63
+73.2%

EPYC 7443 outperforms Core i9-10980XE by an impressive 73% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i9-10980XE and EPYC 7443 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking272105
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation11.7315.95
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
Seriesno dataAMD EPYC
Power efficiency11.8016.86
Architecture codenameCascade Lake-X (2019)Milan (2021−2023)
Release date19 October 2019 (5 years ago)15 March 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$979$2,010

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 7443 has 36% better value for money than i9-10980XE.

Detailed specifications

Core i9-10980XE and EPYC 7443 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 cores18 (Octadeca-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads3648
Base clock speed3 GHz2.85 GHz
Boost clock speed4.8 GHz4 GHz
Bus rate8 GT/s DMI3 MHzno data
Multiplierno data28.5
L1 cache64K (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)512 KB (per core)
L3 cache24.75 MB (shared)128 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm+
Die sizeno data4x 81 mm2
Maximum core temperature86 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data16,600 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Core i9-10980XE and EPYC 7443 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
SocketFCLGA2066SP3
Power consumption (TDP)165 Watt200 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i9-10980XE and EPYC 7443. 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++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX+-
Turbo Boost Max 3.0+no data
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Core i9-10980XE and EPYC 7443 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i9-10980XE and EPYC 7443 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 i9-10980XE and EPYC 7443. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size256 GB4 TiB
Max memory channels4no data
Maximum memory bandwidth94 GB/s204.795 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i9-10980XE and EPYC 7443.

PCIe version3.04.0
PCI Express lanes48128

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.

i9-10980XE 20.57
EPYC 7443 35.63
+73.2%

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.

i9-10980XE 32670
EPYC 7443 56601
+73.3%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.57 35.63
Recency 19 October 2019 15 March 2021
Physical cores 18 24
Threads 36 48
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 165 Watt 200 Watt

i9-10980XE has 21.2% lower power consumption.

EPYC 7443, on the other hand, has a 73.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 7443 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i9-10980XE in performance tests.

Note that Core i9-10980XE is a desktop processor while EPYC 7443 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i9-10980XE and EPYC 7443, 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 i9-10980XE
Core i9-10980XE
AMD EPYC 7443
EPYC 7443

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.


3.8 570 votes

Rate Core i9-10980XE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 6 votes

Rate EPYC 7443 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i9-10980XE or EPYC 7443, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.