
EPYC 7742
Popular choices:

Ryzen 9 5900X
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 7742
2019Why buy it
- ✅+78.3% higher PassMark.
- ✅+300% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 64 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 24.
- ✅433.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 5900X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.0 vs 71.0 PassMark/$ ($6,950 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
- ❌114.3% higher power demand at 225W vs 105W.
Ryzen 9 5900X
2020Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +49.3% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $6,401 less on MSRP ($549 MSRP vs $6,950 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 610.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 71.0 vs 10.0 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $6,950 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 105W instead of 225W, a 120W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (38,955 vs 69,448).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (64 MB vs 256 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7742, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 7742
2019Ryzen 9 5900X
2020Why buy it
- ✅+78.3% higher PassMark.
- ✅+300% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 64 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 24.
- ✅433.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +49.3% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $6,401 less on MSRP ($549 MSRP vs $6,950 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 610.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 71.0 vs 10.0 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $6,950 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 105W instead of 225W, a 120W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 5900X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.0 vs 71.0 PassMark/$ ($6,950 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
- ❌114.3% higher power demand at 225W vs 105W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (38,955 vs 69,448).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (64 MB vs 256 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7742, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen 9 5900X better than EPYC 7742?
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 7742 | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 192 FPS | 323 FPS |
| medium | 172 FPS | 291 FPS |
| high | 138 FPS | 243 FPS |
| ultra | 110 FPS | 193 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 157 FPS | 307 FPS |
| medium | 132 FPS | 248 FPS |
| high | 101 FPS | 192 FPS |
| ultra | 82 FPS | 157 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 72 FPS | 193 FPS |
| medium | 65 FPS | 156 FPS |
| high | 50 FPS | 115 FPS |
| ultra | 40 FPS | 103 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | EPYC 7742 | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 247 FPS | 772 FPS |
| medium | 221 FPS | 647 FPS |
| high | 183 FPS | 508 FPS |
| ultra | 148 FPS | 450 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 202 FPS | 619 FPS |
| medium | 186 FPS | 536 FPS |
| high | 158 FPS | 443 FPS |
| ultra | 124 FPS | 364 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 126 FPS | 365 FPS |
| medium | 118 FPS | 318 FPS |
| high | 103 FPS | 289 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 255 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | EPYC 7742 | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 629 FPS | 832 FPS |
| medium | 536 FPS | 645 FPS |
| high | 486 FPS | 558 FPS |
| ultra | 415 FPS | 459 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 524 FPS | 721 FPS |
| medium | 446 FPS | 565 FPS |
| high | 394 FPS | 488 FPS |
| ultra | 338 FPS | 407 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 389 FPS | 511 FPS |
| medium | 312 FPS | 421 FPS |
| high | 274 FPS | 374 FPS |
| ultra | 224 FPS | 308 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | EPYC 7742 | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 906 FPS | 974 FPS |
| medium | 828 FPS | 974 FPS |
| high | 713 FPS | 934 FPS |
| ultra | 618 FPS | 826 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 711 FPS | 959 FPS |
| medium | 623 FPS | 843 FPS |
| high | 534 FPS | 726 FPS |
| ultra | 454 FPS | 617 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 503 FPS | 694 FPS |
| medium | 454 FPS | 621 FPS |
| high | 401 FPS | 541 FPS |
| ultra | 346 FPS | 437 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 7742 and Ryzen 9 5900X

EPYC 7742
EPYC 7742
The EPYC 7742 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 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 2.25 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 14 nm process technology. Socket: TR4. Thermal design power (TDP): 225 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 69,448 points. Launch price was $6,950.


Ryzen 9 5900X
Ryzen 9 5900X
The Ryzen 9 5900X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 5 November 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 38,955 points. Launch price was $549.
Processing Power
The EPYC 7742 packs 64 cores / 128 threads, while the Ryzen 9 5900X offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the EPYC 7742 has 52 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.4 GHz on the EPYC 7742 versus 4.8 GHz on the Ryzen 9 5900X — a 34.1% clock advantage for the Ryzen 9 5900X (base: 2.25 GHz vs 3.7 GHz). The EPYC 7742 uses the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture (7 nm, 14 nm), while the Ryzen 9 5900X uses Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022) (7 nm, 12 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7742 scores 69,448 against the Ryzen 9 5900X's 38,955 — a 56.3% lead for the EPYC 7742. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 7742 vs 64 MB on the Ryzen 9 5900X.
| Feature | EPYC 7742 | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 64 / 128+433% | 12 / 24 |
| Boost Clock | 3.4 GHz | 4.8 GHz+41% |
| Base Clock | 2.25 GHz | 3.7 GHz+64% |
| L3 Cache | 256 MB (total)+300% | 64 MB |
| L2 Cache | 512K (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| Process | 7 nm, 14 nm | 7 nm, 12 nm |
| Architecture | Zen 2 (2017−2020) | Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022) |
| PassMark | 69,448+78% | 38,955 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 21,000 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 2,174 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 11,888 |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 7742 uses the TR4 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Ryzen 9 5900X uses AM4 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 3200 on the EPYC 7742 versus DDR4-3200 on the Ryzen 9 5900X — the EPYC 7742 supports 199.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7742 supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 128 GB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 8 (EPYC 7742) vs 2 (Ryzen 9 5900X). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 7742) vs 24 (Ryzen 9 5900X) — the EPYC 7742 offers 104 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP3 (EPYC 7742) and A320,B350,X370,B450,X470,B550,X570 (Ryzen 9 5900X).
| Feature | EPYC 7742 | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | TR4 | 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 | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128+433% | 24 |
Advanced Features
Only the Ryzen 9 5900X has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (EPYC 7742) vs AMD-V (Ryzen 9 5900X). Primary use case: Ryzen 9 5900X targets Workstation. Direct competitor: EPYC 7742 rivals Xeon Platinum 8280; Ryzen 9 5900X rivals Core i9-12900K.
| Feature | EPYC 7742 | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | None | — |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | AMD-V |
| Target Use | — | Workstation |
Value Analysis
The EPYC 7742 launched at $6950 MSRP, while the Ryzen 9 5900X debuted at $549. On MSRP ($6950 vs $549), the Ryzen 9 5900X is $6401 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 7742 delivers 10.0 pts/$ vs 71.0 pts/$ for the Ryzen 9 5900X — making the Ryzen 9 5900X the 150.6% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 7742 | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $6950 | $549-92% |
| Performance per Dollar | 10.0 | 71.0+610% |
| Release Date | 2019 | 2020 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












