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 75F3

2021

Why buy it

✅+2.5% higher PassMark.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).
✅100% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 64) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper 3970X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.0 vs 14.0 PassMark/$ ($5,383 MSRP vs $4,491 MSRP).

Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +29.2% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $892 less on MSRP ($4,491 MSRP vs $5,383 MSRP).
✅Delivers 17.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 14.0 vs 12.0 PassMark/$ ($4,491 MSRP vs $5,383 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (62,946 vs 64,505).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 256 MB).

EPYC 75F3

2021

Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

2019

Why buy it

✅+2.5% higher PassMark.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).
✅100% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 64) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +29.2% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $892 less on MSRP ($4,491 MSRP vs $5,383 MSRP).
✅Delivers 17.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 14.0 vs 12.0 PassMark/$ ($4,491 MSRP vs $5,383 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper 3970X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.0 vs 14.0 PassMark/$ ($5,383 MSRP vs $4,491 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (62,946 vs 64,505).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 256 MB).

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 75F3 better than Ryzen Threadripper 3970X?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Ryzen Threadripper 3970X is ahead with a 29.2% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 75F3 pulls ahead with 2.5% better PassMark. EPYC 75F3 also has the bigger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 75F3 is the better fit. You are getting 2.5% better PassMark, backed by 32 cores and 64 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).

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

EPYC 75F3 is still the faster CPU overall, but Ryzen Threadripper 3970X makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. EPYC 75F3 is 19.9% more expensive on MSRP at $5,383 MSRP versus $4,491 MSRP, and it gives you 2.5% better PassMark. The trade-off is that Ryzen Threadripper 3970X is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 29.2% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. Ryzen Threadripper 3970X is also 17.0% better value on MSRP (14.0 vs 12.0 PassMark/$), 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 75F3 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2021 vs 2019), 100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 32 cores / 64 threads instead of 32/64. 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 75F3 Benchmark Check

Ryzen Threadripper 3970X Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 75F3	Ryzen Threadripper 3970X
1080p
low	198 FPS	270 FPS
medium	161 FPS	222 FPS
high	130 FPS	183 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	131 FPS
1440p
low	162 FPS	211 FPS
medium	126 FPS	164 FPS
high	98 FPS	130 FPS
ultra	78 FPS	96 FPS
4K
low	73 FPS	98 FPS
medium	61 FPS	81 FPS
high	47 FPS	63 FPS
ultra	39 FPS	51 FPS

Open EPYC 75F3 Open Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 75F3	Ryzen Threadripper 3970X
1080p
low	507 FPS	806 FPS
medium	443 FPS	681 FPS
high	354 FPS	528 FPS
ultra	288 FPS	457 FPS
1440p
low	417 FPS	652 FPS
medium	373 FPS	565 FPS
high	308 FPS	458 FPS
ultra	243 FPS	373 FPS
4K
low	257 FPS	381 FPS
medium	234 FPS	333 FPS
high	205 FPS	296 FPS
ultra	171 FPS	261 FPS

Open EPYC 75F3 Open Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 75F3	Ryzen Threadripper 3970X
1080p
low	948 FPS	1025 FPS
medium	792 FPS	927 FPS
high	734 FPS	862 FPS
ultra	657 FPS	765 FPS
1440p
low	661 FPS	776 FPS
medium	552 FPS	644 FPS
high	503 FPS	580 FPS
ultra	442 FPS	506 FPS
4K
low	472 FPS	539 FPS
medium	374 FPS	428 FPS
high	330 FPS	381 FPS
ultra	268 FPS	306 FPS

Open EPYC 75F3 Open Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 75F3	Ryzen Threadripper 3970X
1080p
low	1006 FPS	1325 FPS
medium	908 FPS	1015 FPS
high	782 FPS	1073 FPS
ultra	679 FPS	875 FPS
1440p
low	770 FPS	1031 FPS
medium	671 FPS	900 FPS
high	575 FPS	778 FPS
ultra	500 FPS	656 FPS
4K
low	556 FPS	744 FPS
medium	495 FPS	662 FPS
high	435 FPS	579 FPS
ultra	374 FPS	437 FPS

Open EPYC 75F3 Open Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 75F3 and Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

EPYC 75F3

The EPYC 75F3 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 2.95 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): 280 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 64,505 points. Launch price was $4,860.

Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

The Ryzen Threadripper 3970X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 25 November 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Matisse (2019−2020) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.5 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: TR4. Thermal design power (TDP): 280 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 62,946 points. Launch price was $1,999.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the EPYC 75F3 and Ryzen Threadripper 3970X share an identical 32-core/64-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the EPYC 75F3 versus 4.5 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper 3970X — a 11.8% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper 3970X (base: 2.95 GHz vs 3.7 GHz). The EPYC 75F3 uses the Milan (2021−2023) architecture (7 nm+), while the Ryzen Threadripper 3970X uses Matisse (2019−2020) (7 nm, 12 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 75F3 scores 64,505 against the Ryzen Threadripper 3970X's 62,946 — a 2.4% lead for the EPYC 75F3. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 75F3 vs 128 MB on the Ryzen Threadripper 3970X.

Feature	EPYC 75F3	Ryzen Threadripper 3970X
Cores / Threads	32 / 64	32 / 64
Boost Clock	4 GHz	4.5 GHz+13%
Base Clock	2.95 GHz	3.7 GHz+25%
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)+100%	128 MB
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	512K (per core)
Process	7 nm+	7 nm, 12 nm
Architecture	Milan (2021−2023)	Matisse (2019−2020)
PassMark	64,505+2%	62,946
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	44,510
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,664
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	13,739

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 75F3 uses the SP3 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper 3970X uses TR4 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 3200 on the EPYC 75F3 versus DDR4-3200 on the Ryzen Threadripper 3970X — the EPYC 75F3 supports 199.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 75F3 supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 256 GB — 176.5% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 8 (EPYC 75F3) vs 4 (Ryzen Threadripper 3970X). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 75F3) vs 64 (Ryzen Threadripper 3970X) — the EPYC 75F3 offers 64 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP3 (EPYC 75F3) and TRX40 (Ryzen Threadripper 3970X).

Feature	EPYC 75F3	Ryzen Threadripper 3970X
Socket	SP3	TR4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	3200+79900%	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	4096	256 GB+6553500%
RAM Channels	8+100%	4
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+100%	64

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Ryzen Threadripper 3970X has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (EPYC 75F3) vs true (Ryzen Threadripper 3970X). Direct competitor: EPYC 75F3 rivals Xeon Platinum 8380; Ryzen Threadripper 3970X rivals Core i9-10980XE.

Feature	EPYC 75F3	Ryzen Threadripper 3970X
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	true

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 75F3 launched at $5383 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper 3970X debuted at $4491. On MSRP ($5383 vs $4491), the Ryzen Threadripper 3970X is $892 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 75F3 delivers 12.0 pts/$ vs 14.0 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper 3970X — making the Ryzen Threadripper 3970X the 15.6% better value option.