
EPYC 73F3
Popular choices:

Ryzen 5 3600
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
About PassMark
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
2021Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +41.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 24.
- ✅433.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 13.1 vs 88.9 PassMark/$ ($3,521 MSRP vs $199 MSRP).
- ❌269.2% higher power demand at 240W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Ryzen 5 3600.
Ryzen 5 3600
2019Why buy it
- ✅Costs $3,322 less on MSRP ($199 MSRP vs $3,521 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 578.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 88.9 vs 13.1 PassMark/$ ($199 MSRP vs $3,521 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 240W, a 175W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 73F3.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 73F3 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (17,685 vs 46,103).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 73F3, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 73F3
2021Ryzen 5 3600
2019Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +41.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 24.
- ✅433.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Why buy it
- ✅Costs $3,322 less on MSRP ($199 MSRP vs $3,521 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 578.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 88.9 vs 13.1 PassMark/$ ($199 MSRP vs $3,521 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 240W, a 175W reduction.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike EPYC 73F3.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 13.1 vs 88.9 PassMark/$ ($3,521 MSRP vs $199 MSRP).
- ❌269.2% higher power demand at 240W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Ryzen 5 3600.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 73F3 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (17,685 vs 46,103).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 73F3, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 73F3 better than Ryzen 5 3600?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | EPYC 73F3 | Ryzen 5 3600 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 200 FPS | 200 FPS |
| medium | 159 FPS | 161 FPS |
| high | 128 FPS | 135 FPS |
| ultra | 98 FPS | 106 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 166 FPS | 154 FPS |
| medium | 128 FPS | 119 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 96 FPS |
| ultra | 78 FPS | 75 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 74 FPS | 70 FPS |
| medium | 61 FPS | 58 FPS |
| high | 48 FPS | 46 FPS |
| ultra | 39 FPS | 36 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | EPYC 73F3 | Ryzen 5 3600 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 510 FPS | 442 FPS |
| medium | 446 FPS | 404 FPS |
| high | 357 FPS | 332 FPS |
| ultra | 290 FPS | 295 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 418 FPS | 420 FPS |
| medium | 375 FPS | 359 FPS |
| high | 309 FPS | 303 FPS |
| ultra | 244 FPS | 263 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 257 FPS | 297 FPS |
| medium | 235 FPS | 259 FPS |
| high | 206 FPS | 230 FPS |
| ultra | 171 FPS | 201 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | EPYC 73F3 | Ryzen 5 3600 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 979 FPS | 442 FPS |
| medium | 819 FPS | 442 FPS |
| high | 760 FPS | 442 FPS |
| ultra | 678 FPS | 442 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 675 FPS | 442 FPS |
| medium | 564 FPS | 442 FPS |
| high | 515 FPS | 442 FPS |
| ultra | 453 FPS | 432 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 482 FPS | 442 FPS |
| medium | 382 FPS | 361 FPS |
| high | 338 FPS | 305 FPS |
| ultra | 274 FPS | 242 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | EPYC 73F3 | Ryzen 5 3600 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 1146 FPS | 442 FPS |
| medium | 1015 FPS | 442 FPS |
| high | 873 FPS | 442 FPS |
| ultra | 758 FPS | 442 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 842 FPS | 442 FPS |
| medium | 733 FPS | 442 FPS |
| high | 620 FPS | 442 FPS |
| ultra | 539 FPS | 442 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 608 FPS | 442 FPS |
| medium | 542 FPS | 442 FPS |
| high | 471 FPS | 413 FPS |
| ultra | 407 FPS | 357 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 73F3 and Ryzen 5 3600

EPYC 73F3
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.


Ryzen 5 3600
Ryzen 5 3600
The Ryzen 5 3600 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 July 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Matisse (2019−2020) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 17,685 points. Launch price was $199.
Processing Power
The EPYC 73F3 packs 16 cores / 32 threads, while the Ryzen 5 3600 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the EPYC 73F3 has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the EPYC 73F3 versus 4.2 GHz on the Ryzen 5 3600 — a 4.9% clock advantage for the Ryzen 5 3600 (base: 3.5 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The EPYC 73F3 uses the Milan (2021−2023) architecture (7 nm+), while the Ryzen 5 3600 uses Matisse (2019−2020) (7 nm, 12 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 73F3 scores 46,103 against the Ryzen 5 3600's 17,685 — a 89.1% lead for the EPYC 73F3. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 73F3 vs 32 MB (total) on the Ryzen 5 3600.
| Feature | EPYC 73F3 | Ryzen 5 3600 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 16 / 32+167% | 6 / 12 |
| Boost Clock | 4 GHz | 4.2 GHz+5% |
| Base Clock | 3.5 GHz | 3.6 GHz+3% |
| L3 Cache | 256 MB (total)+700% | 32 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| Process | 7 nm+ | 7 nm, 12 nm |
| Architecture | Milan (2021−2023) | Matisse (2019−2020) |
| PassMark | 46,103+161% | 17,685 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 9,500 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 1,295 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 1,898 |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 73F3 uses the SP3 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Ryzen 5 3600 uses AM4 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 3200 on the EPYC 73F3 versus DDR4-3200 on the Ryzen 5 3600 — the EPYC 73F3 supports 199.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 73F3 supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 128 GB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 8 (EPYC 73F3) vs 2 (Ryzen 5 3600). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 73F3) vs 24 (Ryzen 5 3600) — the EPYC 73F3 offers 104 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP3,C621A (EPYC 73F3) and AMD B550,AMD X570,AMD B450,AMD X470 (Ryzen 5 3600).
| Feature | EPYC 73F3 | Ryzen 5 3600 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP3 | AM4 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 4.0 | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | 3200+79900% | DDR4-3200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4096 | 128 GB+3276700% |
| RAM Channels | 8+300% | 2 |
| ECC Support | Yes | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 128+433% | 24 |
Advanced Features
Only the Ryzen 5 3600 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the EPYC 73F3 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (EPYC 73F3) vs Yes (Ryzen 5 3600). Primary use case: Ryzen 5 3600 targets Gaming/Budget Workstation. Direct competitor: EPYC 73F3 rivals Xeon Platinum 8362; Ryzen 5 3600 rivals Core i5-10400.
| Feature | EPYC 73F3 | Ryzen 5 3600 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | None | — |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | Yes | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | Yes |
| Target Use | — | Gaming/Budget Workstation |
Value Analysis
The EPYC 73F3 launched at $3521 MSRP, while the Ryzen 5 3600 debuted at $199. On MSRP ($3521 vs $199), the Ryzen 5 3600 is $3322 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 73F3 delivers 13.1 pts/$ vs 88.9 pts/$ for the Ryzen 5 3600 — making the Ryzen 5 3600 the 148.6% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 73F3 | Ryzen 5 3600 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $3521 | $199-94% |
| Performance per Dollar | 13.1 | 88.9+579% |
| Release Date | 2021 | 2019 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












