i3-9100F vs EPYC 9754

VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 9754
2023
128 cores / 256 threads, 360 Watt
63.24
+1392%
Core i3-9100F
2019
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
4.24

EPYC 9754 outperforms Core i3-9100F by a whopping 1392% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 9754 and Core i3-9100F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking121370
Place by popularitynot in top-10040
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.039.87
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
Seriesno dataIntel Core i3
Power efficiency16.626.17
Architecture codenameBergamo (2023)Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019)
Release date13 June 2023 (1 year ago)23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$11,900$122

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

i3-9100F has 858% better value for money than EPYC 9754.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 9754 and Core i3-9100F 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 cores1284 (Quad-Core)
Threads2564
Base clock speed2.25 GHz3.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3.1 GHz4.2 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 3.0
Bus rateno data4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplierno data36
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)256K (per core)
L3 cache256 MB (shared)6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography5 nm14 nm
Die size8x 73 mm2126 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
Number of transistors71,000 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data+

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 9754 and Core i3-9100F 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 configuration21 (Uniprocessor)
SocketSP5FCLGA1151
Power consumption (TDP)360 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 9754 and Core i3-9100F. 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+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Precision Boost 2+no data

Security technologies

EPYC 9754 and Core i3-9100F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
MPX-+
Identity Protection-+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 9754 and Core i3-9100F 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 9754 and Core i3-9100F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR5DDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data64 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/A-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 9754 and Core i3-9100F.

PCIe version5.03.0
PCI Express lanes12816

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 9754 63.24
+1392%
i3-9100F 4.24

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 9754 100460
+1392%
i3-9100F 6733

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 63.24 4.24
Recency 13 June 2023 23 April 2019
Physical cores 128 4
Threads 256 4
Chip lithography 5 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 360 Watt 65 Watt

EPYC 9754 has a 1391.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 3100% more physical cores and 6300% more threads, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

i3-9100F, on the other hand, has 453.8% lower power consumption.

The EPYC 9754 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i3-9100F in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 9754 is a server/workstation processor while Core i3-9100F is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 9754 and Core i3-9100F, 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 9754
EPYC 9754
Intel Core i3-9100F
Core i3-9100F

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.


3.7 36 votes

Rate EPYC 9754 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 7010 votes

Rate Core i3-9100F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 9754 or Core i3-9100F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.