EPYC 9374F vs Xeon Platinum 8592+

CPU

GPU

EPYC 9374F

32 Cores64 Thrd320 WWMax: 4.3 GHz2022

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Xeon Platinum 8592+

64 Cores128 Thrd350 WWMax: 3.9 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

EPYC 9374F

32 / 64

82,009

0.0%

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 Platinum 8592+

64 / 128

84,013

+2.4%

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: +18.4% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $6,750 less on MSRP ($4,850 MSRP vs $11,600 MSRP).
✅Delivers 133.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 16.9 vs 7.2 PassMark/$ ($4,850 MSRP vs $11,600 MSRP).
✅Draws 320W instead of 350W, a 30W reduction.
✅60% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 80) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (82,009 vs 84,013).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (256 MB vs 320 MB).

Xeon Platinum 8592+

2023

Why buy it

✅+2.4% higher PassMark.
✅+25% larger total L3 cache (320 MB vs 256 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9374F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 7.2 vs 16.9 PassMark/$ ($11,600 MSRP vs $4,850 MSRP).

EPYC 9374F

2022

Xeon Platinum 8592+

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +18.4% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $6,750 less on MSRP ($4,850 MSRP vs $11,600 MSRP).
✅Delivers 133.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 16.9 vs 7.2 PassMark/$ ($4,850 MSRP vs $11,600 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

✅+2.4% higher PassMark.
✅+25% larger total L3 cache (320 MB vs 256 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (82,009 vs 84,013).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (256 MB vs 320 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9374F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 7.2 vs 16.9 PassMark/$ ($11,600 MSRP vs $4,850 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9374F better than Xeon Platinum 8592+?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, EPYC 9374F is ahead with a 18.4% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Xeon Platinum 8592+ pulls ahead with 2.4% better PassMark. Xeon Platinum 8592+ also has the bigger cache pool with 25% larger total L3 cache (320 MB vs 256 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon Platinum 8592+ is the better fit. You are getting 2.4% better PassMark, backed by 64 cores and 128 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 25% larger total L3 cache (320 MB vs 256 MB).

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

EPYC 9374F is the smarter buy today. EPYC 9374F is $6,750 cheaper on MSRP at $4,850 MSRP versus $11,600 MSRP, and it gives you a 18.4% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Xeon Platinum 8592+ is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 2.4% better PassMark. It is also 133.5% better value on MSRP (16.9 vs 7.2 PassMark/$), 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 Platinum 8592+ is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2022), 25% larger total L3 cache (320 MB vs 256 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 64 cores / 128 threads instead of 32/64. That extra cache should hold up really well in CPU-limited games and high-refresh builds.

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 Platinum 8592+ Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9374F	Xeon Platinum 8592+
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

Open EPYC 9374F Open Xeon Platinum 8592+

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9374F	Xeon Platinum 8592+
1080p
low	637 FPS	277 FPS
medium	556 FPS	246 FPS
high	449 FPS	203 FPS
ultra	392 FPS	167 FPS
1440p
low	538 FPS	230 FPS
medium	478 FPS	208 FPS
high	397 FPS	177 FPS
ultra	327 FPS	141 FPS
4K
low	334 FPS	143 FPS
medium	300 FPS	131 FPS
high	269 FPS	119 FPS
ultra	240 FPS	99 FPS

Open EPYC 9374F Open Xeon Platinum 8592+

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9374F	Xeon Platinum 8592+
1080p
low	817 FPS	849 FPS
medium	690 FPS	768 FPS
high	624 FPS	730 FPS
ultra	545 FPS	641 FPS
1440p
low	616 FPS	737 FPS
medium	518 FPS	662 FPS
high	461 FPS	626 FPS
ultra	395 FPS	558 FPS
4K
low	441 FPS	493 FPS
medium	352 FPS	402 FPS
high	310 FPS	364 FPS
ultra	247 FPS	303 FPS

Open EPYC 9374F Open Xeon Platinum 8592+

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9374F	Xeon Platinum 8592+
1080p
low	1138 FPS	938 FPS
medium	1015 FPS	849 FPS
high	875 FPS	732 FPS
ultra	784 FPS	633 FPS
1440p
low	880 FPS	776 FPS
medium	774 FPS	677 FPS
high	654 FPS	581 FPS
ultra	570 FPS	497 FPS
4K
low	623 FPS	559 FPS
medium	564 FPS	501 FPS
high	488 FPS	443 FPS
ultra	425 FPS	383 FPS

Open EPYC 9374F Open Xeon Platinum 8592+

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9374F and Xeon Platinum 8592+

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 8592+

The Xeon Platinum 8592+ 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 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 320 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: 84,013 points. Launch price was $11,600.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9374F packs 32 cores / 64 threads, while the Xeon Platinum 8592+ offers 64 cores / 128 threads — the Xeon Platinum 8592+ has 32 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the EPYC 9374F versus 3.9 GHz on the Xeon Platinum 8592+ — a 9.8% clock advantage for the EPYC 9374F (base: 3.85 GHz vs 1.9 GHz). The EPYC 9374F uses the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture (5 nm, 6 nm), while the Xeon Platinum 8592+ uses Emerald Rapids (2023) (10 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9374F scores 82,009 against the Xeon Platinum 8592+'s 84,013 — a 2.4% lead for the Xeon Platinum 8592+. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9374F vs 320 MB (total) on the Xeon Platinum 8592+.

Feature	EPYC 9374F	Xeon Platinum 8592+
Cores / Threads	32 / 64	64 / 128+100%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+10%	3.9 GHz
Base Clock	3.85 GHz+103%	1.9 GHz
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)	320 MB (total)+25%
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	84,013+2%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9374F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon Platinum 8592+ uses LGA4677 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 4800 on the EPYC 9374F versus 5600 on the Xeon Platinum 8592+ — the Xeon Platinum 8592+ supports 15.4% 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 Platinum 8592+). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9374F) vs 80 (Xeon Platinum 8592+) — the EPYC 9374F offers 48 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9374F) and C741 (Xeon Platinum 8592+).

Feature	EPYC 9374F	Xeon Platinum 8592+
Socket	SP5	LGA4677
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	4800	5600+17%
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 (Xeon Platinum 8592+). Direct competitor: EPYC 9374F rivals Xeon Platinum 8480+; Xeon Platinum 8592+ rivals EPYC 9554.

Feature	EPYC 9374F	Xeon Platinum 8592+
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

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9374F launched at $4850 MSRP, while the Xeon Platinum 8592+ debuted at $11600. On MSRP ($4850 vs $11600), the EPYC 9374F is $6750 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9374F delivers 16.9 pts/$ vs 7.2 pts/$ for the Xeon Platinum 8592+ — making the EPYC 9374F the 80% better value option.