EPYC 9375F vs EPYC 9474F

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 9375F

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,474 less on MSRP ($5,306 MSRP vs $6,780 MSRP).
✅Delivers 19.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 18.0 vs 15.1 PassMark/$ ($5,306 MSRP vs $6,780 MSRP).
✅Draws 320W instead of 360W, a 40W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (95,768 vs 102,255).

EPYC 9474F

2022

Why buy it

✅+6.8% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.1 vs 18.0 PassMark/$ ($6,780 MSRP vs $5,306 MSRP).

EPYC 9375F

2024

EPYC 9474F

2022

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,474 less on MSRP ($5,306 MSRP vs $6,780 MSRP).
✅Delivers 19.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 18.0 vs 15.1 PassMark/$ ($5,306 MSRP vs $6,780 MSRP).
✅Draws 320W instead of 360W, a 40W reduction.

Why buy it

✅+6.8% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (95,768 vs 102,255).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.1 vs 18.0 PassMark/$ ($6,780 MSRP vs $5,306 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9375F better than EPYC 9474F?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, EPYC 9375F is ahead with a 0.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9474F pulls ahead with 6.8% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9474F is the better fit. You are getting 6.8% better PassMark, backed by 48 cores and 96 threads.

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

EPYC 9375F is the smarter buy today. EPYC 9375F is $1,474 cheaper on MSRP at $5,306 MSRP versus $6,780 MSRP, and it gives you a 0.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that EPYC 9474F is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 6.8% better PassMark. It is also 19.7% better value on MSRP (18.0 vs 15.1 PassMark/$), 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 9375F 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 9375F Benchmark Check

EPYC 9474F Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9375F	EPYC 9474F
1080p
low	315 FPS	218 FPS
medium	290 FPS	179 FPS
high	240 FPS	154 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	108 FPS
1440p
low	278 FPS	189 FPS
medium	230 FPS	151 FPS
high	178 FPS	121 FPS
ultra	158 FPS	86 FPS
4K
low	191 FPS	77 FPS
medium	157 FPS	64 FPS
high	120 FPS	50 FPS
ultra	107 FPS	41 FPS

Open EPYC 9375F Open EPYC 9474F

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9375F	EPYC 9474F
1080p
low	725 FPS	615 FPS
medium	618 FPS	537 FPS
high	485 FPS	433 FPS
ultra	421 FPS	378 FPS
1440p
low	579 FPS	516 FPS
medium	510 FPS	459 FPS
high	419 FPS	381 FPS
ultra	341 FPS	316 FPS
4K
low	338 FPS	320 FPS
medium	300 FPS	288 FPS
high	270 FPS	258 FPS
ultra	239 FPS	232 FPS

Open EPYC 9375F Open EPYC 9474F

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9375F	EPYC 9474F
1080p
low	923 FPS	787 FPS
medium	748 FPS	671 FPS
high	675 FPS	608 FPS
ultra	572 FPS	534 FPS
1440p
low	724 FPS	586 FPS
medium	584 FPS	497 FPS
high	515 FPS	443 FPS
ultra	433 FPS	384 FPS
4K
low	511 FPS	423 FPS
medium	421 FPS	339 FPS
high	374 FPS	299 FPS
ultra	309 FPS	240 FPS

Open EPYC 9375F Open EPYC 9474F

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9375F	EPYC 9474F
1080p
low	1141 FPS	1075 FPS
medium	1015 FPS	974 FPS
high	902 FPS	829 FPS
ultra	813 FPS	732 FPS
1440p
low	890 FPS	819 FPS
medium	784 FPS	717 FPS
high	688 FPS	607 FPS
ultra	600 FPS	521 FPS
4K
low	650 FPS	592 FPS
medium	579 FPS	531 FPS
high	515 FPS	461 FPS
ultra	437 FPS	393 FPS

Open EPYC 9375F Open EPYC 9474F

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9375F and EPYC 9474F

EPYC 9375F

The EPYC 9375F is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 3.85 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 256 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: 95,768 points. Launch price was $5,306.

EPYC 9474F

The EPYC 9474F 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 48 cores and 96 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 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): 360 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 102,255 points. Launch price was $6,780.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9375F packs 32 cores / 64 threads, while the EPYC 9474F offers 48 cores / 96 threads — the EPYC 9474F has 16 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the EPYC 9375F versus 4.1 GHz on the EPYC 9474F — a 15.7% clock advantage for the EPYC 9375F (base: 3.85 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The EPYC 9375F uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the EPYC 9474F uses Genoa (2022−2023) (5 nm, 6 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9375F scores 95,768 against the EPYC 9474F's 102,255 — a 6.6% lead for the EPYC 9474F. Both processors carry 256 MB (total) of L3 cache.

Feature	EPYC 9375F	EPYC 9474F
Cores / Threads	32 / 64	48 / 96+50%
Boost Clock	4.8 GHz+17%	4.1 GHz
Base Clock	3.85 GHz+7%	3.6 GHz
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)	256 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	1 MB (per core)
Process	4 nm-20%	5 nm, 6 nm
Architecture	Turin (2024)	Genoa (2022−2023)
PassMark	95,768	102,255+7%
Geekbench 6 Single	2,981	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	26,020	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the SP5 socket with PCIe 5.0. Both support up to DDR5-6000 memory speed. Both support up to 6 TB of RAM. Both feature 12-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9375F) and SP5 (EPYC 9474F).

Feature	EPYC 9375F	EPYC 9474F
Socket	SP5	SP5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6000	DDR5-4800
Max RAM Capacity	6 TB	6 TB
RAM Channels	12	12
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128	128

🔧

Advanced Features

Both support AMD-V, SEV-SNP virtualization. Primary use case: EPYC 9375F targets Data Center / Frequency Optimized, EPYC 9474F targets Data Center / Performance Optimized. Direct competitor: EPYC 9375F rivals Xeon 6766E; EPYC 9474F rivals Xeon 8461V.

Feature	EPYC 9375F	EPYC 9474F
Integrated GPU	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V, SEV-SNP	AMD-V, SEV-SNP
Target Use	Data Center / Frequency Optimized	Data Center / Performance Optimized

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9375F launched at $5306 MSRP, while the EPYC 9474F debuted at $6780. On MSRP ($5306 vs $6780), the EPYC 9375F is $1474 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9375F delivers 18.0 pts/$ vs 15.1 pts/$ for the EPYC 9474F — making the EPYC 9375F the 17.9% better value option.