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: +29.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $4,549 less on MSRP ($7,592 MSRP vs $12,141 MSRP).
✅Delivers 49.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 16.1 vs 10.8 PassMark/$ ($7,592 MSRP vs $12,141 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (122,476 vs 130,698).

EPYC 9745

2024

Why buy it

✅+6.7% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9475F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.8 vs 16.1 PassMark/$ ($12,141 MSRP vs $7,592 MSRP).
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

EPYC 9475F

2024

EPYC 9745

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +29.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $4,549 less on MSRP ($7,592 MSRP vs $12,141 MSRP).
✅Delivers 49.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 16.1 vs 10.8 PassMark/$ ($7,592 MSRP vs $12,141 MSRP).

Why buy it

✅+6.7% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (122,476 vs 130,698).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9475F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.8 vs 16.1 PassMark/$ ($12,141 MSRP vs $7,592 MSRP).
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9745 better than EPYC 9475F?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, EPYC 9475F is ahead with a 29.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9745 pulls ahead with 6.7% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9745 is the better fit. You are getting 6.7% better PassMark, backed by 128 cores and 256 threads.

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

EPYC 9745 is still the faster CPU overall, but EPYC 9475F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. EPYC 9745 is 59.9% more expensive on MSRP at $12,141 MSRP versus $7,592 MSRP, and it gives you 6.7% better PassMark. The trade-off is that EPYC 9475F is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 29.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. EPYC 9475F is also 49.9% better value on MSRP (16.1 vs 10.8 PassMark/$), 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 9745 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 9745 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9475F	EPYC 9745
1080p
low	315 FPS	192 FPS
medium	289 FPS	156 FPS
high	240 FPS	126 FPS
ultra	203 FPS	98 FPS
1440p
low	278 FPS	158 FPS
medium	230 FPS	124 FPS
high	178 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	157 FPS	77 FPS
4K
low	191 FPS	72 FPS
medium	157 FPS	60 FPS
high	120 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	107 FPS	39 FPS

Open EPYC 9475F Open EPYC 9745

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9475F	EPYC 9745
1080p
low	725 FPS	525 FPS
medium	618 FPS	450 FPS
high	485 FPS	358 FPS
ultra	421 FPS	291 FPS
1440p
low	579 FPS	431 FPS
medium	510 FPS	379 FPS
high	419 FPS	310 FPS
ultra	341 FPS	245 FPS
4K
low	338 FPS	267 FPS
medium	300 FPS	239 FPS
high	270 FPS	208 FPS
ultra	239 FPS	172 FPS

Open EPYC 9475F Open EPYC 9745

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9475F	EPYC 9745
1080p
low	906 FPS	743 FPS
medium	738 FPS	610 FPS
high	668 FPS	556 FPS
ultra	566 FPS	481 FPS
1440p
low	702 FPS	594 FPS
medium	570 FPS	494 FPS
high	503 FPS	450 FPS
ultra	424 FPS	390 FPS
4K
low	496 FPS	430 FPS
medium	411 FPS	335 FPS
high	365 FPS	298 FPS
ultra	302 FPS	240 FPS

Open EPYC 9475F Open EPYC 9745

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9475F	EPYC 9745
1080p
low	1139 FPS	974 FPS
medium	1015 FPS	884 FPS
high	901 FPS	761 FPS
ultra	812 FPS	658 FPS
1440p
low	888 FPS	750 FPS
medium	782 FPS	656 FPS
high	687 FPS	561 FPS
ultra	598 FPS	482 FPS
4K
low	648 FPS	538 FPS
medium	578 FPS	481 FPS
high	513 FPS	422 FPS
ultra	437 FPS	365 FPS

Open EPYC 9475F Open EPYC 9745

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9475F and EPYC 9745

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 9745

The EPYC 9745 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 128 cores and 256 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 400 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 130,698 points. Launch price was $12,141.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9475F packs 48 cores / 96 threads, while the EPYC 9745 offers 128 cores / 256 threads — the EPYC 9745 has 80 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the EPYC 9475F versus 3.7 GHz on the EPYC 9745 — a 25.9% clock advantage for the EPYC 9475F (base: 3.65 GHz vs 2.4 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 9745's 130,698 — a 6.5% lead for the EPYC 9745. Both processors carry 256 MB (total) of L3 cache.

Feature	EPYC 9475F	EPYC 9745
Cores / Threads	48 / 96	128 / 256+167%
Boost Clock	4.8 GHz+30%	3.7 GHz
Base Clock	3.65 GHz+52%	2.4 GHz
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)	256 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	1 MB (per core)
Process	4 nm	3 nm-25%
Architecture	Turin (2024)	Turin (2024)
PassMark	122,476	130,698+7%
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 9745).

Feature	EPYC 9475F	EPYC 9745
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 9745). Primary use case: EPYC 9475F targets Server, EPYC 9745 targets Data Center / High Density. Direct competitor: EPYC 9475F rivals Xeon 6952P; EPYC 9745 rivals Xeon 6980P.

Feature	EPYC 9475F	EPYC 9745
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	Yes	—
Virtualization	AMD-V	AMD-V, SEV-SNP
Target Use	Server	Data Center / High Density

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9475F launched at $7592 MSRP, while the EPYC 9745 debuted at $12141. On MSRP ($7592 vs $12141), the EPYC 9475F is $4549 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9475F delivers 16.1 pts/$ vs 10.8 pts/$ for the EPYC 9745 — making the EPYC 9475F the 39.9% better value option.