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.

EPYC 73F3

2021

Why buy it

✅+700% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 32 MB).
✅357.1% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 28) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4464P across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (46,103 vs 47,185).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 13.1 vs 110.0 PassMark/$ ($3,521 MSRP vs $429 MSRP).
❌128.6% higher power demand at 240W vs 105W.
❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while EPYC 4464P moves to AM5 and DDR5.

EPYC 4464P

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +21.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $3,092 less on MSRP ($429 MSRP vs $3,521 MSRP).
✅Delivers 740.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 110.0 vs 13.1 PassMark/$ ($429 MSRP vs $3,521 MSRP).
✅Draws 105W instead of 240W, a 135W reduction.
✅Newer platform on AM5 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (32 MB vs 256 MB).

EPYC 73F3

2021

EPYC 4464P

2024

Why buy it

✅+700% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 32 MB).
✅357.1% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 28) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +21.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $3,092 less on MSRP ($429 MSRP vs $3,521 MSRP).
✅Delivers 740.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 110.0 vs 13.1 PassMark/$ ($429 MSRP vs $3,521 MSRP).
✅Draws 105W instead of 240W, a 135W reduction.
✅Newer platform on AM5 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 4464P across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (46,103 vs 47,185).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 13.1 vs 110.0 PassMark/$ ($3,521 MSRP vs $429 MSRP).
❌128.6% higher power demand at 240W vs 105W.
❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while EPYC 4464P moves to AM5 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (32 MB vs 256 MB).

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 4464P better than EPYC 73F3?

Yes. EPYC 4464P is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 21.5% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data, 2.3% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, EPYC 4464P is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 21.5% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 4464P is the better fit. You are getting 2.3% better PassMark, backed by 12 cores and 24 threads.

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

EPYC 4464P is the smarter buy today. EPYC 4464P is $3,092 cheaper on MSRP at $429 MSRP versus $3,521 MSRP, and it gives you a 21.5% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 740.0% better value on MSRP (110.0 vs 13.1 PassMark/$), 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 4464P is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2021), a healthier platform with AM5 and DDR5 instead of SP3, and more multi-core headroom with 12 cores / 24 threads instead of 16/32. 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.

EPYC 73F3 Benchmark Check

EPYC 4464P Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 73F3	EPYC 4464P
1080p
low	200 FPS	252 FPS
medium	159 FPS	231 FPS
high	128 FPS	200 FPS
ultra	98 FPS	172 FPS
1440p
low	166 FPS	222 FPS
medium	128 FPS	183 FPS
high	99 FPS	153 FPS
ultra	78 FPS	135 FPS
4K
low	74 FPS	154 FPS
medium	61 FPS	127 FPS
high	48 FPS	100 FPS
ultra	39 FPS	86 FPS

Open EPYC 73F3 Open EPYC 4464P

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 73F3	EPYC 4464P
1080p
low	510 FPS	585 FPS
medium	446 FPS	493 FPS
high	357 FPS	385 FPS
ultra	290 FPS	341 FPS
1440p
low	418 FPS	503 FPS
medium	375 FPS	444 FPS
high	309 FPS	352 FPS
ultra	244 FPS	294 FPS
4K
low	257 FPS	297 FPS
medium	235 FPS	268 FPS
high	206 FPS	238 FPS
ultra	171 FPS	204 FPS

Open EPYC 73F3 Open EPYC 4464P

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 73F3	EPYC 4464P
1080p
low	979 FPS	1025 FPS
medium	819 FPS	1114 FPS
high	760 FPS	1037 FPS
ultra	678 FPS	875 FPS
1440p
low	675 FPS	938 FPS
medium	564 FPS	832 FPS
high	515 FPS	751 FPS
ultra	453 FPS	650 FPS
4K
low	482 FPS	573 FPS
medium	382 FPS	492 FPS
high	338 FPS	442 FPS
ultra	274 FPS	373 FPS

Open EPYC 73F3 Open EPYC 4464P

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 73F3	EPYC 4464P
1080p
low	1146 FPS	1180 FPS
medium	1015 FPS	1015 FPS
high	873 FPS	942 FPS
ultra	758 FPS	828 FPS
1440p
low	842 FPS	1000 FPS
medium	733 FPS	873 FPS
high	620 FPS	748 FPS
ultra	539 FPS	634 FPS
4K
low	608 FPS	678 FPS
medium	542 FPS	594 FPS
high	471 FPS	525 FPS
ultra	407 FPS	437 FPS

Open EPYC 73F3 Open EPYC 4464P

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 73F3 and EPYC 4464P

EPYC 73F3

The EPYC 73F3 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 15 March 2021 (4 years ago). It is based on the Milan (2021−2023) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm+ process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 240 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 46,103 points. Launch price was $3,521.

EPYC 4464P

The EPYC 4464P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 21 May 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Raphael (2023−2025) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: AM5. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 47,185 points. Launch price was $399.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 73F3 packs 16 cores / 32 threads, while the EPYC 4464P offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the EPYC 73F3 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the EPYC 73F3 versus 5.4 GHz on the EPYC 4464P — a 29.8% clock advantage for the EPYC 4464P (base: 3.5 GHz vs 3.7 GHz). The EPYC 73F3 uses the Milan (2021−2023) architecture (7 nm+), while the EPYC 4464P uses Raphael (2023−2025) (5 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 73F3 scores 46,103 against the EPYC 4464P's 47,185 — a 2.3% lead for the EPYC 4464P. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 73F3 vs 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 4464P.

Feature	EPYC 73F3	EPYC 4464P
Cores / Threads	16 / 32+33%	12 / 24
Boost Clock	4 GHz	5.4 GHz+35%
Base Clock	3.5 GHz	3.7 GHz+6%
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)+700%	32 MB (total)
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	1 MB (per core)+100%
Process	7 nm+	5 nm-29%
Architecture	Milan (2021−2023)	Raphael (2023−2025)
PassMark	46,103	47,185+2%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 73F3 uses the SP3 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the EPYC 4464P uses AM5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 3200 on the EPYC 73F3 versus 5200 on the EPYC 4464P — the EPYC 4464P supports 47.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 73F3 supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 128 — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 8 (EPYC 73F3) vs 2 (EPYC 4464P). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 73F3) vs 28 (EPYC 4464P) — the EPYC 73F3 offers 100 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP3,C621A (EPYC 73F3) and AM5,FL1 (EPYC 4464P).

Feature	EPYC 73F3	EPYC 4464P
Socket	SP3	AM5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	3200	5200+63%
Max RAM Capacity	4096+3100%	128
RAM Channels	8+300%	2
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+357%	28

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the EPYC 4464P has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (EPYC 73F3) vs VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V (EPYC 4464P). The EPYC 4464P includes integrated graphics (AMD Radeon Graphics), while the EPYC 73F3 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: EPYC 73F3 rivals Xeon Platinum 8362; EPYC 4464P rivals Core i9-13900.

Feature	EPYC 73F3	EPYC 4464P
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	None	AMD Radeon Graphics
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 73F3 launched at $3521 MSRP, while the EPYC 4464P debuted at $429. On MSRP ($3521 vs $429), the EPYC 4464P is $3092 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 73F3 delivers 13.1 pts/$ vs 110.0 pts/$ for the EPYC 4464P — making the EPYC 4464P the 157.4% better value option.