EPYC 9374F vs Xeon 6740E

CPU

GPU

EPYC 9374F

32 Cores64 Thrd320 WWMax: 4.3 GHz2022

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Xeon 6740E

96 Cores96 Thrd250 WWMax: 3.2 GHz2024

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

EPYC 9374F

32 / 64

82,009

+7.7%

Ryzen 9 5950X

Ryzen Threadripper 3960X

Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

Ryzen 9 9950X3D

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7980X

Xeon 6740E

96 / 96

76,167

0.0%

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 9374F

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +11.8% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 96 MB).
✅Costs $415 less on MSRP ($4,850 MSRP vs $5,265 MSRP).
✅Delivers 16.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 16.9 vs 14.5 PassMark/$ ($4,850 MSRP vs $5,265 MSRP).
✅60% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 80) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌28% higher power demand at 320W vs 250W.

Xeon 6740E

2024

Why buy it

✅Draws 250W instead of 320W, a 70W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9374F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (76,167 vs 82,009).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (96 MB vs 256 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 14.5 vs 16.9 PassMark/$ ($5,265 MSRP vs $4,850 MSRP).

EPYC 9374F

2022

Xeon 6740E

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +11.8% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 96 MB).
✅Costs $415 less on MSRP ($4,850 MSRP vs $5,265 MSRP).
✅Delivers 16.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 16.9 vs 14.5 PassMark/$ ($4,850 MSRP vs $5,265 MSRP).
✅60% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 80) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅Draws 250W instead of 320W, a 70W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌28% higher power demand at 320W vs 250W.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9374F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (76,167 vs 82,009).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (96 MB vs 256 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 14.5 vs 16.9 PassMark/$ ($5,265 MSRP vs $4,850 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9374F better than Xeon 6740E?

Yes. EPYC 9374F is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 11.8% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data and 7.7% better PassMark, 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 11.8% 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 7.7% better PassMark, backed by 32 cores and 64 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 166.7% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 96 MB).

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

EPYC 9374F is the smarter buy today. EPYC 9374F is $415 cheaper on MSRP at $4,850 MSRP versus $5,265 MSRP, and it gives you a 11.8% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 16.9% better value on MSRP (16.9 vs 14.5 PassMark/$), 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?

Xeon 6740E is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2022). 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 9374F Benchmark Check

Xeon 6740E Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9374F	Xeon 6740E
1080p
low	218 FPS	189 FPS
medium	180 FPS	152 FPS
high	154 FPS	121 FPS
ultra	111 FPS	95 FPS
1440p
low	191 FPS	153 FPS
medium	152 FPS	119 FPS
high	125 FPS	91 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	73 FPS
4K
low	88 FPS	71 FPS
medium	75 FPS	59 FPS
high	59 FPS	46 FPS
ultra	48 FPS	38 FPS

Open EPYC 9374F Open Xeon 6740E

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9374F	Xeon 6740E
1080p
low	637 FPS	437 FPS
medium	556 FPS	378 FPS
high	449 FPS	306 FPS
ultra	392 FPS	241 FPS
1440p
low	538 FPS	359 FPS
medium	478 FPS	319 FPS
high	397 FPS	266 FPS
ultra	327 FPS	203 FPS
4K
low	334 FPS	222 FPS
medium	300 FPS	201 FPS
high	269 FPS	168 FPS
ultra	240 FPS	135 FPS

Open EPYC 9374F Open Xeon 6740E

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9374F	Xeon 6740E
1080p
low	817 FPS	934 FPS
medium	690 FPS	831 FPS
high	624 FPS	779 FPS
ultra	545 FPS	693 FPS
1440p
low	616 FPS	746 FPS
medium	518 FPS	655 FPS
high	461 FPS	614 FPS
ultra	395 FPS	546 FPS
4K
low	441 FPS	479 FPS
medium	352 FPS	378 FPS
high	310 FPS	334 FPS
ultra	247 FPS	272 FPS

Open EPYC 9374F Open Xeon 6740E

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9374F	Xeon 6740E
1080p
low	1138 FPS	918 FPS
medium	1015 FPS	830 FPS
high	875 FPS	715 FPS
ultra	784 FPS	610 FPS
1440p
low	880 FPS	710 FPS
medium	774 FPS	620 FPS
high	654 FPS	530 FPS
ultra	570 FPS	450 FPS
4K
low	623 FPS	509 FPS
medium	564 FPS	455 FPS
high	488 FPS	400 FPS
ultra	425 FPS	344 FPS

Open EPYC 9374F Open Xeon 6740E

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9374F and Xeon 6740E

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.

Xeon 6740E

The Xeon 6740E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 June 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Sierra Forest (2024) architecture. It features 96 cores and 96 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 96 MB (total). L2 cache: 4 MB (per module). Built on Intel 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4710. Thermal design power (TDP): 250 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 76,167 points. Launch price was $5,265.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9374F packs 32 cores / 64 threads, while the Xeon 6740E offers 96 cores / 96 threads — the Xeon 6740E has 64 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the EPYC 9374F versus 3.2 GHz on the Xeon 6740E — a 29.3% clock advantage for the EPYC 9374F (base: 3.85 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The EPYC 9374F uses the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture (5 nm, 6 nm), while the Xeon 6740E uses Sierra Forest (2024) (Intel 3 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9374F scores 82,009 against the Xeon 6740E's 76,167 — a 7.4% lead for the EPYC 9374F. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9374F vs 96 MB (total) on the Xeon 6740E.

Feature	EPYC 9374F	Xeon 6740E
Cores / Threads	32 / 64	96 / 96+200%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+34%	3.2 GHz
Base Clock	3.85 GHz+60%	2.4 GHz
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)+167%	96 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	4 MB (per module)+300%
Process	5 nm, 6 nm	Intel 3 nm-40%
Architecture	Genoa (2022−2023)	Sierra Forest (2024)
PassMark	82,009+8%	76,167

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9374F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon 6740E uses LGA4710 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 4800 on the EPYC 9374F versus 6400 on the Xeon 6740E — the Xeon 6740E supports 28.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9374F supports up to 6144 of RAM compared to 4096 — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9374F) vs 8 (Xeon 6740E). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9374F) vs 80 (Xeon 6740E) — the EPYC 9374F offers 48 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9374F) and C741 (Xeon 6740E).

Feature	EPYC 9374F	Xeon 6740E
Socket	SP5	LGA4710
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	4800	6400+33%
Max RAM Capacity	6144+50%	4096
RAM Channels	12+50%	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+60%	80

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9374F) vs VT-x, VT-d, TDX (Xeon 6740E). Direct competitor: EPYC 9374F rivals Xeon Platinum 8480+; Xeon 6740E rivals EPYC 9005.

Feature	EPYC 9374F	Xeon 6740E
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d, SEV-SNP	VT-x, VT-d, TDX

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9374F launched at $4850 MSRP, while the Xeon 6740E debuted at $5265. On MSRP ($4850 vs $5265), the EPYC 9374F is $415 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9374F delivers 16.9 pts/$ vs 14.5 pts/$ for the Xeon 6740E — making the EPYC 9374F the 15.6% better value option.