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 7543P

2021

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $1,526 less on MSRP ($2,730 MSRP vs $4,256 MSRP).
✅Delivers 57.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 24.4 vs 15.5 PassMark/$ ($2,730 MSRP vs $4,256 MSRP).
✅Draws 225W instead of 320W, a 95W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9175F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (256 MB vs 512 MB).
❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while EPYC 9175F moves to SP5 and DDR5.

EPYC 9175F

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +24.6% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (512 MB vs 256 MB).
✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (65,894 vs 66,590).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.5 vs 24.4 PassMark/$ ($4,256 MSRP vs $2,730 MSRP).
❌42.2% higher power demand at 320W vs 225W.

EPYC 7543P

2021

EPYC 9175F

2024

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $1,526 less on MSRP ($2,730 MSRP vs $4,256 MSRP).
✅Delivers 57.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 24.4 vs 15.5 PassMark/$ ($2,730 MSRP vs $4,256 MSRP).
✅Draws 225W instead of 320W, a 95W reduction.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +24.6% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (512 MB vs 256 MB).
✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9175F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (256 MB vs 512 MB).
❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while EPYC 9175F moves to SP5 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (65,894 vs 66,590).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.5 vs 24.4 PassMark/$ ($4,256 MSRP vs $2,730 MSRP).
❌42.2% higher power demand at 320W vs 225W.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 7543P better than EPYC 9175F?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, EPYC 9175F is ahead with a 24.6% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 7543P pulls ahead with 1.1% better PassMark. EPYC 9175F also has the bigger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (512 MB vs 256 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 7543P is the better fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 32 cores and 64 threads.

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

EPYC 7543P is the smarter buy today. EPYC 7543P is $1,526 cheaper on MSRP at $2,730 MSRP versus $4,256 MSRP, and it gives you 1.1% better PassMark. The trade-off is that EPYC 9175F is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 24.6% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 57.5% better value on MSRP (24.4 vs 15.5 PassMark/$), 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 9175F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2021), a healthier platform with SP5 and DDR5 instead of SP3, 100% larger total L3 cache (512 MB vs 256 MB), and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. 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 7543P Benchmark Check

EPYC 9175F Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 7543P	EPYC 9175F
1080p
low	198 FPS	300 FPS
medium	161 FPS	273 FPS
high	129 FPS	226 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	191 FPS
1440p
low	161 FPS	275 FPS
medium	126 FPS	227 FPS
high	98 FPS	176 FPS
ultra	78 FPS	156 FPS
4K
low	73 FPS	189 FPS
medium	61 FPS	156 FPS
high	47 FPS	120 FPS
ultra	39 FPS	106 FPS

Open EPYC 7543P Open EPYC 9175F

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 7543P	EPYC 9175F
1080p
low	507 FPS	811 FPS
medium	443 FPS	688 FPS
high	354 FPS	539 FPS
ultra	288 FPS	466 FPS
1440p
low	417 FPS	665 FPS
medium	373 FPS	587 FPS
high	308 FPS	474 FPS
ultra	243 FPS	383 FPS
4K
low	257 FPS	372 FPS
medium	234 FPS	333 FPS
high	205 FPS	306 FPS
ultra	171 FPS	267 FPS

Open EPYC 7543P Open EPYC 9175F

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 7543P	EPYC 9175F
1080p
low	850 FPS	922 FPS
medium	705 FPS	746 FPS
high	657 FPS	674 FPS
ultra	580 FPS	573 FPS
1440p
low	612 FPS	723 FPS
medium	506 FPS	582 FPS
high	464 FPS	514 FPS
ultra	405 FPS	434 FPS
4K
low	437 FPS	510 FPS
medium	339 FPS	420 FPS
high	303 FPS	373 FPS
ultra	245 FPS	309 FPS

Open EPYC 7543P Open EPYC 9175F

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 7543P	EPYC 9175F
1080p
low	992 FPS	1140 FPS
medium	900 FPS	1015 FPS
high	775 FPS	901 FPS
ultra	671 FPS	813 FPS
1440p
low	763 FPS	890 FPS
medium	665 FPS	782 FPS
high	569 FPS	686 FPS
ultra	490 FPS	596 FPS
4K
low	547 FPS	650 FPS
medium	488 FPS	578 FPS
high	428 FPS	513 FPS
ultra	370 FPS	437 FPS

Open EPYC 7543P Open EPYC 9175F

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 7543P and EPYC 9175F

EPYC 7543P

The EPYC 7543P 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 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm+ process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 225 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 66,590 points. Launch price was $2,730.

EPYC 9175F

The EPYC 9175F is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 4.2 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 512 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 320 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 65,894 points. Launch price was $4,256.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 7543P packs 32 cores / 64 threads, while the EPYC 9175F offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the EPYC 7543P has 16 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the EPYC 7543P versus 5 GHz on the EPYC 9175F — a 29.9% clock advantage for the EPYC 9175F (base: 2.8 GHz vs 4.2 GHz). The EPYC 7543P uses the Milan (2021−2023) architecture (7 nm+), while the EPYC 9175F uses Turin (2024) (4 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7543P scores 66,590 against the EPYC 9175F's 65,894 — a 1.1% lead for the EPYC 7543P. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 7543P vs 512 MB (total) on the EPYC 9175F.

Feature	EPYC 7543P	EPYC 9175F
Cores / Threads	32 / 64+100%	16 / 32
Boost Clock	3.7 GHz	5 GHz+35%
Base Clock	2.8 GHz	4.2 GHz+50%
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)	512 MB (total)+100%
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	1 MB (per core)+100%
Process	7 nm+	4 nm-43%
Architecture	Milan (2021−2023)	Turin (2024)
PassMark	66,590+1%	65,894

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 7543P uses the SP3 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the EPYC 9175F uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 3200 on the EPYC 7543P versus 6400 on the EPYC 9175F — the EPYC 9175F supports 66.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 4096 of RAM. Memory channels: 8 (EPYC 7543P) vs 12 (EPYC 9175F). Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP3 (EPYC 7543P) and SP5 (EPYC 9175F).

Feature	EPYC 7543P	EPYC 9175F
Socket	SP3	SP5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 5.0+25%
Max RAM Speed	3200	6400+100%
Max RAM Capacity	4096	4096
RAM Channels	8	12+50%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128	128

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 9175F supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. Direct competitor: EPYC 7543P rivals Xeon Platinum 8380; EPYC 9175F rivals Xeon 6972P.

Feature	EPYC 7543P	EPYC 9175F
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 7543P launched at $2730 MSRP, while the EPYC 9175F debuted at $4256. On MSRP ($2730 vs $4256), the EPYC 7543P is $1526 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 7543P delivers 24.4 pts/$ vs 15.5 pts/$ for the EPYC 9175F — making the EPYC 7543P the 44.7% better value option.