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 9454

2022

Why buy it

✅+5.3% higher PassMark.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).
✅Draws 290W instead of 350W, a 60W reduction.
✅45.5% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 88) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper 7960X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 16.8 vs 55.7 PassMark/$ ($5,225 MSRP vs $1,499 MSRP).
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Ryzen Threadripper 7960X

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +36.4% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $3,726 less on MSRP ($1,499 MSRP vs $5,225 MSRP).
✅Delivers 231.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 55.7 vs 16.8 PassMark/$ ($1,499 MSRP vs $5,225 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (83,554 vs 87,961).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 256 MB).
❌20.7% higher power demand at 350W vs 290W.

EPYC 9454

2022

Ryzen Threadripper 7960X

2023

Why buy it

✅+5.3% higher PassMark.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).
✅Draws 290W instead of 350W, a 60W reduction.
✅45.5% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 88) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +36.4% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $3,726 less on MSRP ($1,499 MSRP vs $5,225 MSRP).
✅Delivers 231.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 55.7 vs 16.8 PassMark/$ ($1,499 MSRP vs $5,225 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper 7960X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 16.8 vs 55.7 PassMark/$ ($5,225 MSRP vs $1,499 MSRP).
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (83,554 vs 87,961).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 256 MB).
❌20.7% higher power demand at 350W vs 290W.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen Threadripper 7960X better than EPYC 9454?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Ryzen Threadripper 7960X is ahead with a 36.4% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9454 pulls ahead with 5.3% better PassMark. EPYC 9454 also has the bigger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9454 is the better fit. You are getting 5.3% better PassMark, backed by 48 cores and 96 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).

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

Ryzen Threadripper 7960X is the smarter buy today. Ryzen Threadripper 7960X is $3,726 cheaper on MSRP at $1,499 MSRP versus $5,225 MSRP, and it gives you a 36.4% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that EPYC 9454 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 5.3% better PassMark. It is also 231.1% better value on MSRP (55.7 vs 16.8 PassMark/$), 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?

Ryzen Threadripper 7960X is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2022) and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. 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 9454 Benchmark Check

Ryzen Threadripper 7960X Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9454	Ryzen Threadripper 7960X
1080p
low	171 FPS	314 FPS
medium	142 FPS	290 FPS
high	122 FPS	241 FPS
ultra	96 FPS	203 FPS
1440p
low	149 FPS	278 FPS
medium	120 FPS	231 FPS
high	97 FPS	179 FPS
ultra	77 FPS	158 FPS
4K
low	70 FPS	191 FPS
medium	60 FPS	158 FPS
high	47 FPS	121 FPS
ultra	39 FPS	107 FPS

Open EPYC 9454 Open Ryzen Threadripper 7960X

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9454	Ryzen Threadripper 7960X
1080p
low	533 FPS	816 FPS
medium	465 FPS	695 FPS
high	373 FPS	541 FPS
ultra	303 FPS	469 FPS
1440p
low	438 FPS	668 FPS
medium	392 FPS	593 FPS
high	323 FPS	476 FPS
ultra	255 FPS	386 FPS
4K
low	270 FPS	373 FPS
medium	246 FPS	336 FPS
high	216 FPS	307 FPS
ultra	179 FPS	269 FPS

Open EPYC 9454 Open Ryzen Threadripper 7960X

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9454	Ryzen Threadripper 7960X
1080p
low	672 FPS	893 FPS
medium	561 FPS	724 FPS
high	522 FPS	650 FPS
ultra	455 FPS	553 FPS
1440p
low	511 FPS	716 FPS
medium	426 FPS	581 FPS
high	390 FPS	509 FPS
ultra	337 FPS	428 FPS
4K
low	377 FPS	509 FPS
medium	294 FPS	420 FPS
high	263 FPS	376 FPS
ultra	211 FPS	312 FPS

Open EPYC 9454 Open Ryzen Threadripper 7960X

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9454	Ryzen Threadripper 7960X
1080p
low	902 FPS	1116 FPS
medium	822 FPS	1002 FPS
high	708 FPS	879 FPS
ultra	625 FPS	792 FPS
1440p
low	724 FPS	873 FPS
medium	631 FPS	769 FPS
high	540 FPS	675 FPS
ultra	462 FPS	588 FPS
4K
low	519 FPS	637 FPS
medium	464 FPS	568 FPS
high	407 FPS	505 FPS
ultra	350 FPS	437 FPS

Open EPYC 9454 Open Ryzen Threadripper 7960X

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9454 and Ryzen Threadripper 7960X

EPYC 9454

The EPYC 9454 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 2.75 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 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): 290 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 87,961 points. Launch price was $5,225.

Ryzen Threadripper 7960X

The Ryzen Threadripper 7960X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 19 October 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Storm Peak (2023) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 4.2 GHz, with boost up to 5.3 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: sTR5. Thermal design power (TDP): 350 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 83,554 points. Launch price was $1,499.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9454 packs 48 cores / 96 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper 7960X offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the EPYC 9454 has 24 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the EPYC 9454 versus 5.3 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper 7960X — a 33% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper 7960X (base: 2.75 GHz vs 4.2 GHz). The EPYC 9454 uses the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture (5 nm, 6 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper 7960X uses Storm Peak (2023) (5 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9454 scores 87,961 against the Ryzen Threadripper 7960X's 83,554 — a 5.1% lead for the EPYC 9454. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9454 vs 128 MB (total) on the Ryzen Threadripper 7960X.

Feature	EPYC 9454	Ryzen Threadripper 7960X
Cores / Threads	48 / 96+100%	24 / 48
Boost Clock	3.8 GHz	5.3 GHz+39%
Base Clock	2.75 GHz	4.2 GHz+53%
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)+100%	128 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	1 MB (per core)
Process	5 nm, 6 nm	5 nm
Architecture	Genoa (2022−2023)	Storm Peak (2023)
PassMark	87,961+5%	83,554
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	65,824
Geekbench 6 Single	—	2,780
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	24,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9454 uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper 7960X uses sTR5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-4800 memory speed. The Ryzen Threadripper 7960X supports up to 1024 GB of RAM compared to 6 TB — 197.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9454) vs 4 (Ryzen Threadripper 7960X). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9454) vs 88 (Ryzen Threadripper 7960X) — the EPYC 9454 offers 40 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9454) and TRX50 (Ryzen Threadripper 7960X).

Feature	EPYC 9454	Ryzen Threadripper 7960X
Socket	SP5	sTR5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800	DDR5-5200
Max RAM Capacity	6 TB+500%	1024 GB
RAM Channels	12+200%	4
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+45%	88

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9454) vs true (Ryzen Threadripper 7960X). Primary use case: EPYC 9454 targets Data Center. Direct competitor: EPYC 9454 rivals Xeon Platinum 8468; Ryzen Threadripper 7960X rivals Xeon w7-3445.

Feature	EPYC 9454	Ryzen Threadripper 7960X
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	—	None
Unlocked	—	Yes
AVX-512	—	Yes
Virtualization	AMD-V, SEV-SNP	true
Target Use	Data Center	—

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9454 launched at $5225 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper 7960X debuted at $1499. On MSRP ($5225 vs $1499), the Ryzen Threadripper 7960X is $3726 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9454 delivers 16.8 pts/$ vs 55.7 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper 7960X — making the Ryzen Threadripper 7960X the 107.2% better value option.