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 8434P

2023

Why buy it

✅+0.9% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $2,739 less on MSRP ($1,517 MSRP vs $4,256 MSRP).
✅Delivers 183.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 43.8 vs 15.5 PassMark/$ ($1,517 MSRP vs $4,256 MSRP).
✅Draws 200W instead of 320W, a 120W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9175F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 512 MB).

EPYC 9175F

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +28.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+300% larger total L3 cache (512 MB vs 128 MB).
✅33.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 96) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (65,894 vs 66,490).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.5 vs 43.8 PassMark/$ ($4,256 MSRP vs $1,517 MSRP).
❌60% higher power demand at 320W vs 200W.

EPYC 8434P

2023

EPYC 9175F

2024

Why buy it

✅+0.9% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $2,739 less on MSRP ($1,517 MSRP vs $4,256 MSRP).
✅Delivers 183.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 43.8 vs 15.5 PassMark/$ ($1,517 MSRP vs $4,256 MSRP).
✅Draws 200W instead of 320W, a 120W reduction.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +28.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+300% larger total L3 cache (512 MB vs 128 MB).
✅33.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 96) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9175F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 512 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (65,894 vs 66,490).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.5 vs 43.8 PassMark/$ ($4,256 MSRP vs $1,517 MSRP).
❌60% higher power demand at 320W vs 200W.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 8434P better than EPYC 9175F?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, EPYC 9175F is ahead with a 28.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 8434P pulls ahead with 0.9% better PassMark. EPYC 9175F also has the bigger cache pool with 300% larger total L3 cache (512 MB vs 128 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 8434P is the better fit. You are getting 0.9% better PassMark, backed by 48 cores and 96 threads.

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

EPYC 8434P is the smarter buy today. EPYC 8434P is $2,739 cheaper on MSRP at $1,517 MSRP versus $4,256 MSRP, and it gives you 0.9% better PassMark. The trade-off is that EPYC 9175F is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 28.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 183.1% better value on MSRP (43.8 vs 15.5 PassMark/$), 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 2023) and 300% larger total L3 cache (512 MB vs 128 MB). 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 8434P Benchmark Check

EPYC 9175F Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 8434P	EPYC 9175F
1080p
low	159 FPS	300 FPS
medium	131 FPS	273 FPS
high	110 FPS	226 FPS
ultra	87 FPS	191 FPS
1440p
low	142 FPS	275 FPS
medium	114 FPS	227 FPS
high	90 FPS	176 FPS
ultra	72 FPS	156 FPS
4K
low	68 FPS	189 FPS
medium	58 FPS	156 FPS
high	45 FPS	120 FPS
ultra	37 FPS	106 FPS

Open EPYC 8434P Open EPYC 9175F

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 8434P	EPYC 9175F
1080p
low	419 FPS	811 FPS
medium	369 FPS	688 FPS
high	300 FPS	539 FPS
ultra	236 FPS	466 FPS
1440p
low	344 FPS	665 FPS
medium	311 FPS	587 FPS
high	260 FPS	474 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	383 FPS
4K
low	212 FPS	372 FPS
medium	195 FPS	333 FPS
high	163 FPS	306 FPS
ultra	132 FPS	267 FPS

Open EPYC 8434P Open EPYC 9175F

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 8434P	EPYC 9175F
1080p
low	860 FPS	922 FPS
medium	786 FPS	746 FPS
high	760 FPS	674 FPS
ultra	682 FPS	573 FPS
1440p
low	663 FPS	723 FPS
medium	587 FPS	582 FPS
high	558 FPS	514 FPS
ultra	498 FPS	434 FPS
4K
low	435 FPS	510 FPS
medium	344 FPS	420 FPS
high	307 FPS	373 FPS
ultra	250 FPS	309 FPS

Open EPYC 8434P Open EPYC 9175F

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 8434P	EPYC 9175F
1080p
low	1023 FPS	1140 FPS
medium	913 FPS	1015 FPS
high	772 FPS	901 FPS
ultra	651 FPS	813 FPS
1440p
low	833 FPS	890 FPS
medium	712 FPS	782 FPS
high	598 FPS	686 FPS
ultra	492 FPS	596 FPS
4K
low	600 FPS	650 FPS
medium	524 FPS	578 FPS
high	451 FPS	513 FPS
ultra	376 FPS	437 FPS

Open EPYC 8434P Open EPYC 9175F

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 8434P and EPYC 9175F

EPYC 8434P

The EPYC 8434P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 18 September 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Siena (2023−2024) architecture. It features 48 cores and 96 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.1 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: SP6. Thermal design power (TDP): 200 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 66,490 points. Launch price was $2,700.

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 8434P packs 48 cores / 96 threads, while the EPYC 9175F offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the EPYC 8434P has 32 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.1 GHz on the EPYC 8434P versus 5 GHz on the EPYC 9175F — a 46.9% clock advantage for the EPYC 9175F (base: 2.5 GHz vs 4.2 GHz). The EPYC 8434P uses the Siena (2023−2024) architecture (5 nm), while the EPYC 9175F uses Turin (2024) (4 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 8434P scores 66,490 against the EPYC 9175F's 65,894 — a 0.9% lead for the EPYC 8434P. L3 cache: 128 MB (total) on the EPYC 8434P vs 512 MB (total) on the EPYC 9175F.

Feature	EPYC 8434P	EPYC 9175F
Cores / Threads	48 / 96+200%	16 / 32
Boost Clock	3.1 GHz	5 GHz+61%
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	4.2 GHz+68%
L3 Cache	128 MB (total)	512 MB (total)+300%
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	1 MB (per core)
Process	5 nm	4 nm-20%
Architecture	Siena (2023−2024)	Turin (2024)
PassMark	66,490	65,894

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 8434P uses the SP6 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the EPYC 9175F uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 4800 on the EPYC 8434P versus 6400 on the EPYC 9175F — the EPYC 9175F supports 28.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9175F supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 1152 — 112.2% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 6 (EPYC 8434P) vs 12 (EPYC 9175F). PCIe lanes: 96 (EPYC 8434P) vs 128 (EPYC 9175F) — the EPYC 9175F offers 32 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP6 (EPYC 8434P) and SP5 (EPYC 9175F).

Feature	EPYC 8434P	EPYC 9175F
Socket	SP6	SP5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 5.0+25%
Max RAM Speed	4800	6400+33%
Max RAM Capacity	1152	4096+256%
RAM Channels	6	12+100%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	96	128+33%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. Direct competitor: EPYC 8434P rivals Xeon Platinum 8452Y; EPYC 9175F rivals Xeon 6972P.

Feature	EPYC 8434P	EPYC 9175F
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 8434P launched at $1517 MSRP, while the EPYC 9175F debuted at $4256. On MSRP ($1517 vs $4256), the EPYC 8434P is $2739 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 8434P delivers 43.8 pts/$ vs 15.5 pts/$ for the EPYC 9175F — making the EPYC 8434P the 95.6% better value option.