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

✅+81.6% higher Geekbench multi-core.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 16.1 vs 18.1 PassMark/$ ($7,592 MSRP vs $7,349 MSRP).

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $243 less on MSRP ($7,349 MSRP vs $7,592 MSRP).
✅Delivers 12.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 18.1 vs 16.1 PassMark/$ ($7,349 MSRP vs $7,592 MSRP).
✅Draws 350W instead of 400W, a 50W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (24,780 vs 45,000).

EPYC 9475F

2024

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

2023

Why buy it

✅+81.6% higher Geekbench multi-core.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $243 less on MSRP ($7,349 MSRP vs $7,592 MSRP).
✅Delivers 12.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 18.1 vs 16.1 PassMark/$ ($7,349 MSRP vs $7,592 MSRP).
✅Draws 350W instead of 400W, a 50W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 16.1 vs 18.1 PassMark/$ ($7,592 MSRP vs $7,349 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (24,780 vs 45,000).

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX better than EPYC 9475F?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX is ahead with a 4.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9475F pulls ahead with 81.6% better Geekbench multi-core.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9475F is the better fit. You are getting 81.6% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 48 cores and 96 threads.

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

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX is the smarter buy today. Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX is $243 cheaper on MSRP at $7,349 MSRP versus $7,592 MSRP, and it gives you a 4.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that EPYC 9475F is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 81.6% better Geekbench multi-core. It is also 12.3% better value on MSRP (18.1 vs 16.1 PassMark/$), 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 9475F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2023) and more multi-core headroom with 48 cores / 96 threads instead of 64/128. 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 9475F Benchmark Check

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9475F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX
1080p
low	315 FPS	302 FPS
medium	289 FPS	279 FPS
high	240 FPS	230 FPS
ultra	203 FPS	195 FPS
1440p
low	278 FPS	268 FPS
medium	230 FPS	223 FPS
high	178 FPS	171 FPS
ultra	157 FPS	152 FPS
4K
low	191 FPS	185 FPS
medium	157 FPS	154 FPS
high	120 FPS	117 FPS
ultra	107 FPS	104 FPS

Open EPYC 9475F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9475F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX
1080p
low	725 FPS	787 FPS
medium	618 FPS	672 FPS
high	485 FPS	529 FPS
ultra	421 FPS	462 FPS
1440p
low	579 FPS	649 FPS
medium	510 FPS	577 FPS
high	419 FPS	469 FPS
ultra	341 FPS	380 FPS
4K
low	338 FPS	363 FPS
medium	300 FPS	327 FPS
high	270 FPS	302 FPS
ultra	239 FPS	265 FPS

Open EPYC 9475F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9475F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX
1080p
low	906 FPS	889 FPS
medium	738 FPS	728 FPS
high	668 FPS	654 FPS
ultra	566 FPS	556 FPS
1440p
low	702 FPS	693 FPS
medium	570 FPS	567 FPS
high	503 FPS	498 FPS
ultra	424 FPS	419 FPS
4K
low	496 FPS	490 FPS
medium	411 FPS	407 FPS
high	365 FPS	365 FPS
ultra	302 FPS	303 FPS

Open EPYC 9475F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9475F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX
1080p
low	1139 FPS	1131 FPS
medium	1015 FPS	1014 FPS
high	901 FPS	889 FPS
ultra	812 FPS	802 FPS
1440p
low	888 FPS	890 FPS
medium	782 FPS	783 FPS
high	687 FPS	688 FPS
ultra	598 FPS	599 FPS
4K
low	648 FPS	649 FPS
medium	578 FPS	579 FPS
high	513 FPS	514 FPS
ultra	437 FPS	437 FPS

Open EPYC 9475F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9475F and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

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.

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX 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 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 256 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: 133,149 points. Launch price was $7,349.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9475F packs 48 cores / 96 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX offers 64 cores / 128 threads — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX has 16 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the EPYC 9475F versus 5.1 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX — a 6.1% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX (base: 3.65 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The EPYC 9475F uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX uses Storm Peak (2023) (5 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9475F scores 122,476 against the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX's 133,149 — a 8.4% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,960 vs 2,599, a 28% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 45,000 vs 24,780 (58% advantage for the EPYC 9475F). Both processors carry 256 MB (total) of L3 cache.

Feature	EPYC 9475F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX
Cores / Threads	48 / 96	64 / 128+33%
Boost Clock	4.8 GHz	5.1 GHz+6%
Base Clock	3.65 GHz+14%	3.2 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
Architecture	Turin (2024)	Storm Peak (2023)
PassMark	122,476	133,149+9%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	100,000
Geekbench 6 Single	1,960	2,599+33%
Geekbench 6 Multi	45,000+82%	24,780

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9475F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX uses sTR5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-6000 memory speed. The EPYC 9475F supports up to 6144 GB of RAM compared to 2048 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9475F) vs 8 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX). Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9475F) and WRX90,TRX50 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX).

Feature	EPYC 9475F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX
Socket	SP5	sTR5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6000	DDR5-5200
Max RAM Capacity	6144 GB+200%	2048 GB
RAM Channels	12+50%	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128	128

🔧

Advanced Features

Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: AMD-V (EPYC 9475F) vs true (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX). Primary use case: EPYC 9475F targets Server, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX targets High-end Workstation. Direct competitor: EPYC 9475F rivals Xeon 6952P; Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX rivals Xeon w9-3475X.

Feature	EPYC 9475F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	AMD-V	true
Target Use	Server	High-end Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9475F launched at $7592 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX debuted at $7349. On MSRP ($7592 vs $7349), the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX is $243 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9475F delivers 16.1 pts/$ vs 18.1 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX — making the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX the 11.6% better value option.