AMD EPYC 7F32 vs Intel Core i9-7940X

Processor comparisons   17-03-2021
   If you have difficulties with the choice of a CPU, you will solve them by reading the full tests AMD EPYC 7F32 vs Intel Core i9-7940X and see which is better for games or simple use for video editing, streaming, rendering, machine learning, programming. Here is useful information from real streaming and video editing tests or various benchmarks. A step-by-step analysis of all the technical characteristics, to make it easier to understand, is summarized in the table.
   From the video comparison, you can get the results of joint testing in synthetic type tests like 3DMark, UserBenchmark, PCMark 10, Blender, VeraCrypt, GeekBench 6, 5.2, Dolphin Emulator, World of Tanks enCore Benchmark, PassMark, AIDA64, WPrime, Cinebench 23 (20, 15), Blender, Furmark, SuperPi, 7zip, RealBench, Handbrake, DaVinci Resolve Studio, Prime95, MATLAB, Gears 5.
   And how good the processors are in games:

Borderlands 3
Grand Theft Auto V
Valheim
Cyberpunk 2077
Watch Dogs Legion
Overwatch
DOOM: Eternal
Rainbow Six Siege
Apex Legends
Assassin's Creed Valhalla
Fortnite
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands
Fallout 76
Call of Duty: Warzone and Modern Warfare
Red Dead Redemption 2
Valorant
Last Man Standing
Halo Infinite
Death Stranding

After looking at the data these benchmarks and videos, you can already make an briefed decision about which CPU is better to buy for gaming Intel Core i9-7940X or AMD EPYC 7F32.

Summary benchmark results

As a percentage of the maximum value based on a sample from the entire base of all processors
Processor Benchmark

EPYC 7F32

56%

Core i9-7940X

58%

This value shows the performance of the processors in single-threaded and multi-threaded mode. In this comparison, Core i9-7940X is 3% better than EPYC 7F32. The data source is several popular tests. Detailed information can be found below.

Gaming performance
Summary result of all game benchmarks.

EPYC 7F32

61%

Core i9-7940X

58%

For the maximum in this test, the results of the most powerful processor in the site database are taken. And it is clear that this is a server processor, on which no one will play games. Because the cost of this processor reaches several tens of thousands of dollars. Therefore, if you think that the selected CPU has a small game result, look at the FPS that it produces in real games in the final table below.
List of other games in which CPU comparisons were performed: Control, Horizon Zero Dawn, Microsoft Flight Simulator, Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, Battlefield V, DOTA 2A, League of Legends (LOL), PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG), The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (CS GO), Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Metro Exodus, Hitman 3, Half-Life: Alyx, NBA 2K20, Ghostrunner, Monster Hunter World, Forza Horizon 4.

Gaming benchmark

Fortnite	108.2	103.4
Valorant	122.9	117.5
Cyberpunk 2077	68.8	65.8
Apex Legends	115.5	110.5
Call of Duty Warzone	92.2	88.2
Overwatch	99.6	95.2
Red Dead Redemption 2	84.8	81.1
DOOM Eternal	61.5	58.8
Warzone	95.9	91.7
Assassin's Creed	103.3	98.7
Valheim	102.0	97.6

The numbers in this table indicate the maximum FPS that was received on the device with the corresponding processor. Depending on the configuration of the computer (RAM size and Video Card) and graphics quality settings (Ultra, Medium, Normal), the results may differ quite significantly. We recommend that you better study the results of the Cinebench, GeekBench and Passmark becnmarks.
The computers participating in the comparisons not only were the equipped with different video cards and different amounts of RAM. But users also tested them at different screen resolutions: 2K, FullHD or 4K. Therefore, the game benchmark data is approximate. But all video cards met the average system requirements of games. To be sure exactly how much performance the processor will be in games, if you get acquainted with the benchmarks that are made with the same video card that is installed in your computer.

Power consumption

EPYC 7F32

22%

Core i9-7940X

25%

To make a final resolution on which processor is better, you should also consider the generation of its core. The newer the processor generation, the better its performance in games and benchmarks, as well as its energy efficiency. In this case the Core i9-7940X is more energy efficient than the EPYC 7F32 since it has less power consumption: 180W vs. 165W. Power consumption is especially important for laptops. Also, when choosing a processor cooling system, you need to know its TDP. It is necessary to calculate so that the TDP data specified in the cooler specification is greater than the TDP of the compared processor.

Software benchmarks

If you want to use the processor not only for gaming, but also for programming, video editing or video rendering, streaming, machine learning, then the main parameter for you is its performance in multi-threaded mode. In this mode, the CPU uses all cores and threads that it has to the maximum to achieve maximum efficiency. You will learn this data from the benchmark tables below. Before you take into account the data from these tests, be sure to check whether the program you are going to use on your computer supports multi-threaded mode. Because there are still many programs that use only one core to work, and all the advantages of multi-core mode are unused.
Cinebench 23, 20 an 15
The results of this benchmark show Single-threaded and Multi-threaded CPU performance

	AMD EPYC 7F32	Intel Core i9-7940X
Cinbench 15 Single-core	67	188
Cinbench 15 Multi-core	2750	2849
Cinbench 20 Single-core	446	607
Cinbench 20 Multi-core	5829	5465
Cinbench 23 Single-core	308	1578
Cinbench 23 Multi-core	15159	15728

Passmark
This popular benchmark displays Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance

	AMD EPYC 7F32	Intel Core i9-7940X
Single-Core	2422	2533
Multi-Core	22236	26889

GeekBench 6, 5.2
This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance

	AMD EPYC 7F32	Intel Core i9-7940X
Single-Core	1209	1263
Multi-Core	19778	15127

Comparison of specifications

In the specification comparison table, the processor release date and overclocking capability will be the most helpful. The newer the processor, the longer it will last you. And the easier it will be to upgrade the system later. The same can be said about overclocking. If the processor can be overclocked, thereby increasing its performance, then it will still be able to produce maximum FPS even in new games. It turns out that there is no longer a need to buy a new CPU to enjoy the games any longer. The savings are obvious!

	AMD EPYC 7F32	Intel Core i9-7940X
Announcement date	October 01, 2020	April 01, 2017
Type	Server	Desktop
Socket	SP3	FCLGA2066
Core name	Rome	Skylake
Architecture	Zen 2	x86
Generation	2	7
Turbo Frequency	3.9 MHz	4.3 MHz
Frequency	3.7 MHz	3.1 MHz
Cores	8	14
Threads	16	28
Bus rate		8 GT/s
Bit	64	64
Lithography	7 nm
Transistors count	38000 millions	7800 millions
Power consumption (TDP)	180 W	165 W
Memory type	DDR4	DDR4-2666
Max. Memory		128 Gb
Memory Frequency
Memory bandwidth		85 GB/s
L1 cache
L2 cache
L3 cache	128MB	19.25 MB
Overclocking	Yes	No
Supports ECC	No	No
Part number	100-000000139 100-000000139WOF

In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here EPYC 7F32 is 16% better than Core i9-7940X in terms of CPU frequency. Another difference is that Core i9-7940X has 6 more core than EPYC 7F32. Also keep in mind that high CPU frequency affects battery life through power consumption (relevant for laptops).

Result:
The number of parameters for which AMD EPYC 7F32 is better: 17
The number of parameters for which Intel Core i9-7940X is better: 18
Although it should be understood that all the data in the article above do not mean that taking them into account you should completely trust a simple comparison of these numbers. Better to watch the video tests and read the reviews of of people who bought AMD EPYC 7F32 and Intel Core i9-7940X before making a decision which of the processors to buy for gaming.

• AMD EPYC 7F32 specs and review.

• Intel Core i9-7940X specs and review.