
EPYC 7763
Popular choices:

EPYC 9275F
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 7763
2021Why buy it
- ✅Draws 280W instead of 320W, a 40W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9275F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (84,440 vs 84,620).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.7 vs 24.6 PassMark/$ ($7,890 MSRP vs $3,439 MSRP).
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while EPYC 9275F moves to SP5 and DDR5.
EPYC 9275F
2024Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +29.0% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $4,451 less on MSRP ($3,439 MSRP vs $7,890 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 129.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 24.6 vs 10.7 PassMark/$ ($3,439 MSRP vs $7,890 MSRP).
- ✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.
EPYC 7763
2021EPYC 9275F
2024Why buy it
- ✅Draws 280W instead of 320W, a 40W reduction.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +29.0% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $4,451 less on MSRP ($3,439 MSRP vs $7,890 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 129.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 24.6 vs 10.7 PassMark/$ ($3,439 MSRP vs $7,890 MSRP).
- ✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9275F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (84,440 vs 84,620).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.7 vs 24.6 PassMark/$ ($7,890 MSRP vs $3,439 MSRP).
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while EPYC 9275F moves to SP5 and DDR5.
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 9275F better than EPYC 7763?
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 7763 | EPYC 9275F |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 190 FPS | 315 FPS |
| medium | 155 FPS | 290 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 241 FPS |
| ultra | 96 FPS | 204 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 156 FPS | 278 FPS |
| medium | 123 FPS | 230 FPS |
| high | 94 FPS | 178 FPS |
| ultra | 75 FPS | 159 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 72 FPS | 191 FPS |
| medium | 60 FPS | 157 FPS |
| high | 46 FPS | 120 FPS |
| ultra | 38 FPS | 107 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | EPYC 7763 | EPYC 9275F |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 418 FPS | 725 FPS |
| medium | 367 FPS | 618 FPS |
| high | 299 FPS | 485 FPS |
| ultra | 234 FPS | 421 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 344 FPS | 579 FPS |
| medium | 310 FPS | 510 FPS |
| high | 259 FPS | 419 FPS |
| ultra | 197 FPS | 341 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 211 FPS | 338 FPS |
| medium | 194 FPS | 300 FPS |
| high | 163 FPS | 270 FPS |
| ultra | 131 FPS | 239 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | EPYC 7763 | EPYC 9275F |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 836 FPS | 923 FPS |
| medium | 696 FPS | 748 FPS |
| high | 649 FPS | 675 FPS |
| ultra | 573 FPS | 572 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 602 FPS | 724 FPS |
| medium | 500 FPS | 584 FPS |
| high | 458 FPS | 515 FPS |
| ultra | 400 FPS | 433 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 430 FPS | 511 FPS |
| medium | 335 FPS | 421 FPS |
| high | 300 FPS | 374 FPS |
| ultra | 242 FPS | 309 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | EPYC 7763 | EPYC 9275F |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 975 FPS | 1141 FPS |
| medium | 885 FPS | 1015 FPS |
| high | 761 FPS | 902 FPS |
| ultra | 655 FPS | 813 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 745 FPS | 891 FPS |
| medium | 648 FPS | 785 FPS |
| high | 554 FPS | 689 FPS |
| ultra | 476 FPS | 600 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 531 FPS | 650 FPS |
| medium | 473 FPS | 580 FPS |
| high | 414 FPS | 515 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 437 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 7763 and EPYC 9275F

EPYC 7763
EPYC 7763
The EPYC 7763 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 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 2.45 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 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: 84,440 points. Launch price was $7,890.

EPYC 9275F
EPYC 9275F
The EPYC 9275F is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 4.1 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 256 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: 84,620 points. Launch price was $3,439.
Processing Power
The EPYC 7763 packs 64 cores / 128 threads, while the EPYC 9275F offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the EPYC 7763 has 40 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.5 GHz on the EPYC 7763 versus 4.8 GHz on the EPYC 9275F — a 31.3% clock advantage for the EPYC 9275F (base: 2.45 GHz vs 4.1 GHz). The EPYC 7763 uses the Milan (2021−2023) architecture (7 nm+), while the EPYC 9275F uses Turin (2024) (4 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7763 scores 84,440 against the EPYC 9275F's 84,620 — a 0.2% lead for the EPYC 9275F. Both processors carry 256 MB (total) of L3 cache.
| Feature | EPYC 7763 | EPYC 9275F |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 64 / 128+167% | 24 / 48 |
| Boost Clock | 3.5 GHz | 4.8 GHz+37% |
| Base Clock | 2.45 GHz | 4.1 GHz+67% |
| L3 Cache | 256 MB (total) | 256 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB (per core) | 1 MB (per core)+100% |
| Process | 7 nm+ | 4 nm-43% |
| Architecture | Milan (2021−2023) | Turin (2024) |
| PassMark | 84,440 | 84,620 |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 7763 uses the SP3 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the EPYC 9275F uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 3200 on the EPYC 7763 versus 6000 on the EPYC 9275F — the EPYC 9275F supports 60.9% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9275F supports up to 6144 of RAM compared to 4096 — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 8 (EPYC 7763) vs 12 (EPYC 9275F). Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP3 (EPYC 7763) and SP5 (EPYC 9275F).
| Feature | EPYC 7763 | EPYC 9275F |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP3 | SP5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 4.0 | PCIe 5.0+25% |
| Max RAM Speed | 3200 | 6000+88% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4096 | 6144+50% |
| RAM Channels | 8 | 12+50% |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128 | 128 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 9275F supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, SEV (EPYC 7763) vs VT-x, VT-d, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9275F). Direct competitor: EPYC 7763 rivals Xeon Platinum 8380; EPYC 9275F rivals Xeon 6980P.
| Feature | EPYC 7763 | EPYC 9275F |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | None | None |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d, SEV | VT-x, VT-d, SEV-SNP |
Value Analysis
The EPYC 7763 launched at $7890 MSRP, while the EPYC 9275F debuted at $3439. On MSRP ($7890 vs $3439), the EPYC 9275F is $4451 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 7763 delivers 10.7 pts/$ vs 24.6 pts/$ for the EPYC 9275F — making the EPYC 9275F the 78.8% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 7763 | EPYC 9275F |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $7890 | $3439-56% |
| Performance per Dollar | 10.7 | 24.6+130% |
| Release Date | 2021 | 2024 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













