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

✅Better for gaming: +42.7% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 13.1 vs 25.8 PassMark/$ ($3,521 MSRP vs $1,783 MSRP).
❌33.3% higher power demand at 240W vs 180W.

EPYC 7402

2019

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,738 less on MSRP ($1,783 MSRP vs $3,521 MSRP).
✅Delivers 97.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 25.8 vs 13.1 PassMark/$ ($1,783 MSRP vs $3,521 MSRP).
✅Draws 180W instead of 240W, a 60W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 73F3 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (46,012 vs 46,103).
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

EPYC 73F3

2021

EPYC 7402

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +42.7% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,738 less on MSRP ($1,783 MSRP vs $3,521 MSRP).
✅Delivers 97.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 25.8 vs 13.1 PassMark/$ ($1,783 MSRP vs $3,521 MSRP).
✅Draws 180W instead of 240W, a 60W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 13.1 vs 25.8 PassMark/$ ($3,521 MSRP vs $1,783 MSRP).
❌33.3% higher power demand at 240W vs 180W.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 73F3 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (46,012 vs 46,103).
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 73F3 better than EPYC 7402?

Yes. EPYC 73F3 is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 42.7% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.2% 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 73F3 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 42.7% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests. It also has a big cache advantage at 256 MB vs 32 MB.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 73F3 is the better fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 700% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 32 MB).

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

EPYC 73F3 is still the faster CPU overall, but EPYC 7402 makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. EPYC 73F3 is 97.5% more expensive on MSRP at $3,521 MSRP versus $1,783 MSRP, and it gives you a 42.7% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. EPYC 7402 is also 97.1% better value on MSRP (25.8 vs 13.1 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

EPYC 73F3 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2021 vs 2019), 3D V-Cache and a much larger 256 MB L3 cache instead of 32 MB, more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 32 threads instead of 24/48, and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. That extra cache should hold up really well in CPU-limited games and high-refresh builds.

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 7402 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 73F3	EPYC 7402
1080p
low	200 FPS	158 FPS
medium	159 FPS	131 FPS
high	128 FPS	110 FPS
ultra	98 FPS	87 FPS
1440p
low	166 FPS	132 FPS
medium	128 FPS	107 FPS
high	99 FPS	87 FPS
ultra	78 FPS	69 FPS
4K
low	74 FPS	64 FPS
medium	61 FPS	55 FPS
high	48 FPS	43 FPS
ultra	39 FPS	34 FPS

Open EPYC 73F3 Open EPYC 7402

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 73F3	EPYC 7402
1080p
low	510 FPS	358 FPS
medium	446 FPS	315 FPS
high	357 FPS	263 FPS
ultra	290 FPS	213 FPS
1440p
low	418 FPS	303 FPS
medium	375 FPS	276 FPS
high	309 FPS	236 FPS
ultra	244 FPS	188 FPS
4K
low	257 FPS	195 FPS
medium	235 FPS	179 FPS
high	206 FPS	153 FPS
ultra	171 FPS	123 FPS

Open EPYC 73F3 Open EPYC 7402

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 73F3	EPYC 7402
1080p
low	979 FPS	645 FPS
medium	819 FPS	526 FPS
high	760 FPS	468 FPS
ultra	678 FPS	410 FPS
1440p
low	675 FPS	499 FPS
medium	564 FPS	406 FPS
high	515 FPS	355 FPS
ultra	453 FPS	307 FPS
4K
low	482 FPS	369 FPS
medium	382 FPS	287 FPS
high	338 FPS	245 FPS
ultra	274 FPS	196 FPS

Open EPYC 73F3 Open EPYC 7402

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 73F3	EPYC 7402
1080p
low	1146 FPS	820 FPS
medium	1015 FPS	746 FPS
high	873 FPS	646 FPS
ultra	758 FPS	568 FPS
1440p
low	842 FPS	657 FPS
medium	733 FPS	572 FPS
high	620 FPS	492 FPS
ultra	539 FPS	422 FPS
4K
low	608 FPS	448 FPS
medium	542 FPS	402 FPS
high	471 FPS	359 FPS
ultra	407 FPS	312 FPS

Open EPYC 73F3 Open EPYC 7402

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 73F3 and EPYC 7402

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 7402

The EPYC 7402 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 August 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.35 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm, 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 180 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 46,012 points. Launch price was $1,783.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 73F3 packs 16 cores / 32 threads, while the EPYC 7402 offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the EPYC 7402 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the EPYC 73F3 versus 3.35 GHz on the EPYC 7402 — a 17.7% clock advantage for the EPYC 73F3 (base: 3.5 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The EPYC 73F3 uses the Milan (2021−2023) architecture (7 nm+), while the EPYC 7402 uses Zen 2 (2017−2020) (7 nm, 14 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 73F3 scores 46,103 against the EPYC 7402's 46,012 — a 0.2% lead for the EPYC 73F3. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 73F3 vs 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 7402.

Feature	EPYC 73F3	EPYC 7402
Cores / Threads	16 / 32	24 / 48+50%
Boost Clock	4 GHz+19%	3.35 GHz
Base Clock	3.5 GHz+25%	2.8 GHz
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)+700%	32 MB (total)
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	512 kB (per core)
Process	7 nm+	7 nm, 14 nm
Architecture	Milan (2021−2023)	Zen 2 (2017−2020)
PassMark	46,103	46,012
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	28,546
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,299
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	12,622

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the SP3 socket with PCIe 4.0. Maximum memory speed reaches 3200 on the EPYC 73F3 versus DDR4-3200 on the EPYC 7402 — the EPYC 73F3 supports 199.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 4096 of RAM. Both feature 8-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP3,C621A (EPYC 73F3) and SP3,Rome (EPYC 7402).

Feature	EPYC 73F3	EPYC 7402
Socket	SP3	SP3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	3200+79900%	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	4096	4096 GB+104857500%
RAM Channels	8	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128	128

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 73F3 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (EPYC 73F3) vs AMD-V, SEV, IOMMU (EPYC 7402). Primary use case: EPYC 7402 targets Server / Workstation. Direct competitor: EPYC 73F3 rivals Xeon Platinum 8362; EPYC 7402 rivals Xeon Gold 6242.

Feature	EPYC 73F3	EPYC 7402
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	—
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	Yes	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V, SEV, IOMMU
Target Use	—	Server / Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 73F3 launched at $3521 MSRP, while the EPYC 7402 debuted at $1783. On MSRP ($3521 vs $1783), the EPYC 7402 is $1738 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 73F3 delivers 13.1 pts/$ vs 25.8 pts/$ for the EPYC 7402 — making the EPYC 7402 the 65.4% better value option.