EPYC 4344P vs i9-9900KF

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i9-9900KF
2019
8 cores / 16 threads, 95 Watt
11.54
EPYC 4344P
2024
8 cores / 16 threads, 65 Watt
21.78
+88.7%

EPYC 4344P outperforms Core i9-9900KF by an impressive 89% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i9-9900KF and EPYC 4344P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking674241
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.1849.84
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
SeriesIntel Core i9no data
Power efficiency11.4531.58
Architecture codenameCoffee Lake-R (2018−2019)Raphael (2023−2024)
Release date7 January 2019 (5 years ago)21 May 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$488$329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 4344P has 509% better value for money than i9-9900KF.

Detailed specifications

Core i9-9900KF and EPYC 4344P 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads1616
Base clock speed3.6 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed5 GHz5.3 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
L1 cache512 KB64 KB (per core)
L2 cache2 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache16 MB (shared)32 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm5 nm
Die sizeno data71 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °C61 °C
Number of transistorsno data6,570 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Core i9-9900KF and EPYC 4344P 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)1
SocketFCLGA1151AM5
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i9-9900KF and EPYC 4344P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2no data
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX+-
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Core i9-9900KF and EPYC 4344P technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
MPX+-
Identity Protection+-
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i9-9900KF and EPYC 4344P are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i9-9900KF and EPYC 4344P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2666DDR5
Maximum memory size128 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth42.671 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon Graphics

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i9-9900KF and EPYC 4344P.

PCIe version3.05.0
PCI Express lanes1628

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.

i9-9900KF 11.54
EPYC 4344P 21.78
+88.7%

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.

i9-9900KF 18264
EPYC 4344P 34474
+88.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.54 21.78
Recency 7 January 2019 21 May 2024
Chip lithography 14 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 65 Watt

EPYC 4344P has a 88.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 46.2% lower power consumption.

The EPYC 4344P is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i9-9900KF in performance tests.

Note that Core i9-9900KF is a desktop processor while EPYC 4344P is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i9-9900KF and EPYC 4344P, 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 i9-9900KF
Core i9-9900KF
AMD EPYC 4344P
EPYC 4344P

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.


3.8 503 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate EPYC 4344P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i9-9900KF or EPYC 4344P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.