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 9475F

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +14.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $2,894 less on MSRP ($7,592 MSRP vs $10,486 MSRP).
✅Delivers 25.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 16.1 vs 12.9 PassMark/$ ($7,592 MSRP vs $10,486 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (122,476 vs 135,221).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (256 MB vs 384 MB).

EPYC 9565

2024

Why buy it

✅+10.4% higher PassMark.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 256 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9475F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.9 vs 16.1 PassMark/$ ($10,486 MSRP vs $7,592 MSRP).
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

EPYC 9475F

2024

EPYC 9565

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +14.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $2,894 less on MSRP ($7,592 MSRP vs $10,486 MSRP).
✅Delivers 25.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 16.1 vs 12.9 PassMark/$ ($7,592 MSRP vs $10,486 MSRP).

Why buy it

✅+10.4% higher PassMark.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 256 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (122,476 vs 135,221).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (256 MB vs 384 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9475F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.9 vs 16.1 PassMark/$ ($10,486 MSRP vs $7,592 MSRP).
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9565 better than EPYC 9475F?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, EPYC 9475F is ahead with a 14.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9565 pulls ahead with 10.4% better PassMark. EPYC 9565 also has the bigger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 256 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9565 is the better fit. You are getting 10.4% better PassMark, backed by 72 cores and 144 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 256 MB).

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

EPYC 9565 is still the faster CPU overall, but EPYC 9475F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. EPYC 9565 is 38.1% more expensive on MSRP at $10,486 MSRP versus $7,592 MSRP, and it gives you 10.4% better PassMark. The trade-off is that EPYC 9475F is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 14.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. EPYC 9475F is also 25.1% better value on MSRP (16.1 vs 12.9 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

EPYC 9565 is the safer long-term CPU choice because it gives you more overall headroom and a better platform outlook.

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 9475F Benchmark Check

EPYC 9565 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9475F	EPYC 9565
1080p
low	315 FPS	171 FPS
medium	289 FPS	142 FPS
high	240 FPS	121 FPS
ultra	203 FPS	98 FPS
1440p
low	278 FPS	150 FPS
medium	230 FPS	120 FPS
high	178 FPS	98 FPS
ultra	157 FPS	81 FPS
4K
low	191 FPS	81 FPS
medium	157 FPS	69 FPS
high	120 FPS	55 FPS
ultra	107 FPS	45 FPS

Open EPYC 9475F Open EPYC 9565

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9475F	EPYC 9565
1080p
low	725 FPS	583 FPS
medium	618 FPS	511 FPS
high	485 FPS	415 FPS
ultra	421 FPS	361 FPS
1440p
low	579 FPS	492 FPS
medium	510 FPS	439 FPS
high	419 FPS	367 FPS
ultra	341 FPS	302 FPS
4K
low	338 FPS	306 FPS
medium	300 FPS	276 FPS
high	270 FPS	249 FPS
ultra	239 FPS	222 FPS

Open EPYC 9475F Open EPYC 9565

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9475F	EPYC 9565
1080p
low	906 FPS	747 FPS
medium	738 FPS	634 FPS
high	668 FPS	575 FPS
ultra	566 FPS	506 FPS
1440p
low	702 FPS	561 FPS
medium	570 FPS	474 FPS
high	503 FPS	423 FPS
ultra	424 FPS	366 FPS
4K
low	496 FPS	405 FPS
medium	411 FPS	324 FPS
high	365 FPS	286 FPS
ultra	302 FPS	229 FPS

Open EPYC 9475F Open EPYC 9565

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9475F	EPYC 9565
1080p
low	1139 FPS	969 FPS
medium	1015 FPS	875 FPS
high	901 FPS	752 FPS
ultra	812 FPS	676 FPS
1440p
low	888 FPS	780 FPS
medium	782 FPS	683 FPS
high	687 FPS	583 FPS
ultra	598 FPS	513 FPS
4K
low	648 FPS	551 FPS
medium	578 FPS	496 FPS
high	513 FPS	434 FPS
ultra	437 FPS	380 FPS

Open EPYC 9475F Open EPYC 9565

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9475F and EPYC 9565

EPYC 9475F

The EPYC 9475F is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 48 cores and 96 threads. Base frequency is 3.65 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): 400 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 122,476 points. Launch price was $7,592.

EPYC 9565

The EPYC 9565 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 72 cores and 144 threads. Base frequency is 3.15 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 384 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 400 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 135,221 points. Launch price was $10,486.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9475F packs 48 cores / 96 threads, while the EPYC 9565 offers 72 cores / 144 threads — the EPYC 9565 has 24 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the EPYC 9475F versus 4.3 GHz on the EPYC 9565 — a 11% clock advantage for the EPYC 9475F (base: 3.65 GHz vs 3.15 GHz). Both are built on the Turin (2024) architecture using a 4 nm process. In PassMark, the EPYC 9475F scores 122,476 against the EPYC 9565's 135,221 — a 9.9% lead for the EPYC 9565. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9475F vs 384 MB (total) on the EPYC 9565.

Feature	EPYC 9475F	EPYC 9565
Cores / Threads	48 / 96	72 / 144+50%
Boost Clock	4.8 GHz+12%	4.3 GHz
Base Clock	3.65 GHz+16%	3.15 GHz
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)	384 MB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	1 MB (per core)
Process	4 nm	4 nm
Architecture	Turin (2024)	Turin (2024)
PassMark	122,476	135,221+10%
Geekbench 6 Single	1,960	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	45,000	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the SP5 socket with PCIe 5.0. Both support up to DDR5-6000 memory speed. The EPYC 9475F supports up to 6144 GB of RAM compared to 6 TB — 199.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 12-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9475F) and SP5 (EPYC 9565).

Feature	EPYC 9475F	EPYC 9565
Socket	SP5	SP5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6000	DDR5-6000
Max RAM Capacity	6144 GB	6 TB
RAM Channels	12	12
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128	128

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: AMD-V (EPYC 9475F) vs AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9565). Primary use case: EPYC 9475F targets Server, EPYC 9565 targets Data Center / Cloud Computing. Direct competitor: EPYC 9475F rivals Xeon 6952P; EPYC 9565 rivals Xeon 6972P.

Feature	EPYC 9475F	EPYC 9565
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	Yes	—
Virtualization	AMD-V	AMD-V, SEV-SNP
Target Use	Server	Data Center / Cloud Computing

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9475F launched at $7592 MSRP, while the EPYC 9565 debuted at $10486. On MSRP ($7592 vs $10486), the EPYC 9475F is $2894 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9475F delivers 16.1 pts/$ vs 12.9 pts/$ for the EPYC 9565 — making the EPYC 9475F the 22.3% better value option.