
EPYC 9374F
Popular choices:

Xeon Platinum 8568Y+
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 9374F
2022Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +4.4% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $1,647 less on MSRP ($4,850 MSRP vs $6,497 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 37.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 16.9 vs 12.3 PassMark/$ ($4,850 MSRP vs $6,497 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 320W instead of 350W, a 30W reduction.
- ✅60% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 80) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.
Xeon Platinum 8568Y+
2023Why buy it
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9374F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (79,683 vs 82,009).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.3 vs 16.9 PassMark/$ ($6,497 MSRP vs $4,850 MSRP).
EPYC 9374F
2022Xeon Platinum 8568Y+
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +4.4% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $1,647 less on MSRP ($4,850 MSRP vs $6,497 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 37.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 16.9 vs 12.3 PassMark/$ ($4,850 MSRP vs $6,497 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 320W instead of 350W, a 30W reduction.
- ✅60% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 80) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Why buy it
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9374F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (79,683 vs 82,009).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.3 vs 16.9 PassMark/$ ($6,497 MSRP vs $4,850 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 9374F better than Xeon Platinum 8568Y+?
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 9374F | Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 218 FPS | 188 FPS |
| medium | 180 FPS | 165 FPS |
| high | 154 FPS | 131 FPS |
| ultra | 111 FPS | 106 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 191 FPS | 155 FPS |
| medium | 152 FPS | 131 FPS |
| high | 125 FPS | 100 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 82 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 88 FPS | 70 FPS |
| medium | 75 FPS | 63 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 49 FPS |
| ultra | 48 FPS | 40 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | EPYC 9374F | Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 637 FPS | 505 FPS |
| medium | 556 FPS | 448 FPS |
| high | 449 FPS | 366 FPS |
| ultra | 392 FPS | 301 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 538 FPS | 419 FPS |
| medium | 478 FPS | 378 FPS |
| high | 397 FPS | 317 FPS |
| ultra | 327 FPS | 253 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 334 FPS | 259 FPS |
| medium | 300 FPS | 236 FPS |
| high | 269 FPS | 210 FPS |
| ultra | 240 FPS | 174 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | EPYC 9374F | Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 817 FPS | 910 FPS |
| medium | 690 FPS | 838 FPS |
| high | 624 FPS | 791 FPS |
| ultra | 545 FPS | 698 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 616 FPS | 782 FPS |
| medium | 518 FPS | 716 FPS |
| high | 461 FPS | 673 FPS |
| ultra | 395 FPS | 601 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 441 FPS | 528 FPS |
| medium | 352 FPS | 444 FPS |
| high | 310 FPS | 396 FPS |
| ultra | 247 FPS | 330 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | EPYC 9374F | Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 1138 FPS | 954 FPS |
| medium | 1015 FPS | 865 FPS |
| high | 875 FPS | 748 FPS |
| ultra | 784 FPS | 649 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 880 FPS | 789 FPS |
| medium | 774 FPS | 689 FPS |
| high | 654 FPS | 593 FPS |
| ultra | 570 FPS | 510 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 623 FPS | 572 FPS |
| medium | 564 FPS | 513 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 455 FPS |
| ultra | 425 FPS | 392 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9374F and Xeon Platinum 8568Y+

EPYC 9374F
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 Platinum 8568Y+
Xeon Platinum 8568Y+
The Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 December 2023 (1 year ago). It is based on the Emerald Rapids (2023) architecture. It features 48 cores and 96 threads. Base frequency is 2.3 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 300 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4677. Thermal design power (TDP): 350 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 79,683 points. Launch price was $6,497.
Processing Power
The EPYC 9374F packs 32 cores / 64 threads, while the Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ offers 48 cores / 96 threads — the Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ has 16 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the EPYC 9374F versus 4 GHz on the Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ — a 7.2% clock advantage for the EPYC 9374F (base: 3.85 GHz vs 2.3 GHz). The EPYC 9374F uses the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture (5 nm, 6 nm), while the Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ uses Emerald Rapids (2023) (10 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9374F scores 82,009 against the Xeon Platinum 8568Y+'s 79,683 — a 2.9% lead for the EPYC 9374F. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9374F vs 300 MB (total) on the Xeon Platinum 8568Y+.
| Feature | EPYC 9374F | Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 32 / 64 | 48 / 96+50% |
| Boost Clock | 4.3 GHz+7% | 4 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.85 GHz+67% | 2.3 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 256 MB (total) | 300 MB (total)+17% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core)+100% |
| Process | 5 nm, 6 nm-50% | 10 nm |
| Architecture | Genoa (2022−2023) | Emerald Rapids (2023) |
| PassMark | 82,009+3% | 79,683 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 1,961 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 55,000 |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 9374F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ uses LGA4677 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 4800 on the EPYC 9374F versus DDR5-5600 on the Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ — the EPYC 9374F supports 199.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9374F supports up to 6144 of RAM compared to 4096 GB — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9374F) vs 8 (Xeon Platinum 8568Y+). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9374F) vs 80 (Xeon Platinum 8568Y+) — the EPYC 9374F offers 48 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9374F) and C741 (Xeon Platinum 8568Y+).
| Feature | EPYC 9374F | Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP5 | LGA4677 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0 | PCIe 5.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | 4800+95900% | DDR5-5600 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 6144 | 4096 GB+69904967% |
| 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 (Xeon Platinum 8568Y+). Primary use case: Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ targets High Performance Server. Direct competitor: EPYC 9374F rivals Xeon Platinum 8480+; Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ rivals EPYC 9554.
| Feature | EPYC 9374F | Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ |
|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| Target Use | — | High Performance Server |
Value Analysis
The EPYC 9374F launched at $4850 MSRP, while the Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ debuted at $6497. On MSRP ($4850 vs $6497), the EPYC 9374F is $1647 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9374F delivers 16.9 pts/$ vs 12.3 pts/$ for the Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ — making the EPYC 9374F the 31.8% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 9374F | Xeon Platinum 8568Y+ |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $4850-25% | $6497 |
| Performance per Dollar | 16.9+37% | 12.3 |
| Release Date | 2022 | 2023 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













