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 7C13

2021

Why buy it

✅Costs $2,850 less on MSRP ($2,000 MSRP vs $4,850 MSRP).
✅Delivers 125.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 38.2 vs 16.9 PassMark/$ ($2,000 MSRP vs $4,850 MSRP).
✅Draws 225W instead of 320W, a 95W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9374F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (76,363 vs 82,009).
❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while EPYC 9374F moves to SP5 and DDR5.

EPYC 9374F

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +22.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 16.9 vs 38.2 PassMark/$ ($4,850 MSRP vs $2,000 MSRP).
❌42.2% higher power demand at 320W vs 225W.

EPYC 7C13

2021

EPYC 9374F

2022

Why buy it

✅Costs $2,850 less on MSRP ($2,000 MSRP vs $4,850 MSRP).
✅Delivers 125.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 38.2 vs 16.9 PassMark/$ ($2,000 MSRP vs $4,850 MSRP).
✅Draws 225W instead of 320W, a 95W reduction.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +22.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9374F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (76,363 vs 82,009).
❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while EPYC 9374F moves to SP5 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 16.9 vs 38.2 PassMark/$ ($4,850 MSRP vs $2,000 MSRP).
❌42.2% higher power demand at 320W vs 225W.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9374F better than EPYC 7C13?

Yes. EPYC 9374F is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 22.9% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data, 7.4% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, EPYC 9374F is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 22.9% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9374F is the better fit. You are getting 7.4% better PassMark, backed by 32 cores and 64 threads.

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

EPYC 9374F is still the faster CPU overall, but EPYC 7C13 makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. EPYC 9374F is 142.5% more expensive on MSRP at $4,850 MSRP versus $2,000 MSRP, and it gives you a 22.9% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. EPYC 7C13 is also 125.8% better value on MSRP (38.2 vs 16.9 PassMark/$), 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 9374F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2022 vs 2021), a healthier platform with SP5 and DDR5 instead of SP3, more multi-core headroom with 32 cores / 64 threads instead of 64/128, 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 7C13 Benchmark Check

EPYC 9374F Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 7C13	EPYC 9374F
1080p
low	195 FPS	218 FPS
medium	159 FPS	180 FPS
high	129 FPS	154 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	111 FPS
1440p
low	160 FPS	191 FPS
medium	125 FPS	152 FPS
high	97 FPS	125 FPS
ultra	77 FPS	92 FPS
4K
low	72 FPS	88 FPS
medium	60 FPS	75 FPS
high	47 FPS	59 FPS
ultra	39 FPS	48 FPS

Open EPYC 7C13 Open EPYC 9374F

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 7C13	EPYC 9374F
1080p
low	267 FPS	637 FPS
medium	235 FPS	556 FPS
high	193 FPS	449 FPS
ultra	158 FPS	392 FPS
1440p
low	219 FPS	538 FPS
medium	198 FPS	478 FPS
high	167 FPS	397 FPS
ultra	133 FPS	327 FPS
4K
low	135 FPS	334 FPS
medium	124 FPS	300 FPS
high	112 FPS	269 FPS
ultra	94 FPS	240 FPS

Open EPYC 7C13 Open EPYC 9374F

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 7C13	EPYC 9374F
1080p
low	837 FPS	817 FPS
medium	698 FPS	690 FPS
high	650 FPS	624 FPS
ultra	574 FPS	545 FPS
1440p
low	602 FPS	616 FPS
medium	500 FPS	518 FPS
high	459 FPS	461 FPS
ultra	401 FPS	395 FPS
4K
low	430 FPS	441 FPS
medium	336 FPS	352 FPS
high	300 FPS	310 FPS
ultra	243 FPS	247 FPS

Open EPYC 7C13 Open EPYC 9374F

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 7C13	EPYC 9374F
1080p
low	977 FPS	1138 FPS
medium	886 FPS	1015 FPS
high	761 FPS	875 FPS
ultra	659 FPS	784 FPS
1440p
low	753 FPS	880 FPS
medium	657 FPS	774 FPS
high	560 FPS	654 FPS
ultra	481 FPS	570 FPS
4K
low	541 FPS	623 FPS
medium	481 FPS	564 FPS
high	422 FPS	488 FPS
ultra	364 FPS	425 FPS

Open EPYC 7C13 Open EPYC 9374F

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 7C13 and EPYC 9374F

EPYC 7C13

The EPYC 7C13 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2021-03-01. It is based on the Milan (2021−2023) architecture. It features 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 3.68 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. Passmark benchmark score: 76,363 points. Launch price was $5,000.

EPYC 9374F

The EPYC 9374F is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 November 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 3.85 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm, 6 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 320 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 82,009 points. Launch price was $4,850.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 7C13 packs 64 cores / 128 threads, while the EPYC 9374F offers 32 cores / 64 threads — the EPYC 7C13 has 32 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.68 GHz on the EPYC 7C13 versus 4.3 GHz on the EPYC 9374F — a 15.5% clock advantage for the EPYC 9374F (base: 2 GHz vs 3.85 GHz). The EPYC 7C13 uses the Milan (2021−2023) architecture (7 nm), while the EPYC 9374F uses Genoa (2022−2023) (5 nm, 6 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7C13 scores 76,363 against the EPYC 9374F's 82,009 — a 7.1% lead for the EPYC 9374F. Both processors carry 256 MB (total) of L3 cache.

Feature	EPYC 7C13	EPYC 9374F
Cores / Threads	64 / 128+100%	32 / 64
Boost Clock	3.68 GHz	4.3 GHz+17%
Base Clock	2 GHz	3.85 GHz+93%
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)	256 MB (total)
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	1 MB (per core)+100%
Process	7 nm	5 nm, 6 nm-29%
Architecture	Milan (2021−2023)	Genoa (2022−2023)
PassMark	76,363	82,009+7%
Geekbench 6 Single	1,538	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	37,000	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 7C13 uses the SP3 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the EPYC 9374F uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-3200 on the EPYC 7C13 versus 4800 on the EPYC 9374F — the EPYC 9374F supports 199.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9374F supports up to 6144 of RAM compared to 4096 GB — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 8 (EPYC 7C13) vs 12 (EPYC 9374F). Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP3 (EPYC 7C13) and SP5 (EPYC 9374F).

Feature	EPYC 7C13	EPYC 9374F
Socket	SP3	SP5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 5.0+25%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-3200	4800+119900%
Max RAM Capacity	4096 GB+69904967%	6144
RAM Channels	8	12+50%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128	128

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 9374F supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: AMD-V (EPYC 7C13) vs VT-x, VT-d, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9374F). Primary use case: EPYC 7C13 targets Enterprise Server. Direct competitor: EPYC 7C13 rivals Xeon Platinum 8380; EPYC 9374F rivals Xeon Platinum 8480+.

Feature	EPYC 7C13	EPYC 9374F
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	AMD-V	VT-x, VT-d, SEV-SNP
Target Use	Enterprise Server	—

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 7C13 launched at $2000 MSRP, while the EPYC 9374F debuted at $4850. On MSRP ($2000 vs $4850), the EPYC 7C13 is $2850 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 7C13 delivers 38.2 pts/$ vs 16.9 pts/$ for the EPYC 9374F — making the EPYC 7C13 the 77.2% better value option.