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 9565

2024

Why buy it

✅+502.9% higher PassMark.
✅+1100% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 32 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 72 cores / 144 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 24.
✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of AM4 and DDR4.
✅433.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 3700X across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.9 vs 68.2 PassMark/$ ($10,486 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
❌515.4% higher power demand at 400W vs 65W.

Ryzen 7 3700X

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $10,157 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $10,486 MSRP).
✅Delivers 428.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 68.2 vs 12.9 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $10,486 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 400W, a 335W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (22,430 vs 135,221).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (32 MB vs 384 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9565, which brings 72 cores / 144 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
❌Older platform position on AM4 with DDR4, while EPYC 9565 moves to SP5 and DDR5.

EPYC 9565

2024

Ryzen 7 3700X

2019

Why buy it

✅+502.9% higher PassMark.
✅+1100% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 32 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 72 cores / 144 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 24.
✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of AM4 and DDR4.
✅433.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $10,157 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $10,486 MSRP).
✅Delivers 428.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 68.2 vs 12.9 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $10,486 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 400W, a 335W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 3700X across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.9 vs 68.2 PassMark/$ ($10,486 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
❌515.4% higher power demand at 400W vs 65W.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (22,430 vs 135,221).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (32 MB vs 384 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9565, which brings 72 cores / 144 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
❌Older platform position on AM4 with DDR4, while EPYC 9565 moves to SP5 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 7 3700X better than EPYC 9565?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 9565 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Ryzen 7 3700X is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

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 502.9% better PassMark, backed by 72 cores and 144 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 1100% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 32 MB).

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

Ryzen 7 3700X is the smarter buy today. Ryzen 7 3700X is $10,157 cheaper on MSRP at $329 MSRP versus $10,486 MSRP, and it gives you a 6.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that EPYC 9565 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 502.9% better PassMark. It is also 428.7% better value on MSRP (68.2 vs 12.9 PassMark/$), 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 9565 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2019), a healthier platform with SP5 and DDR5 instead of AM4, 1100% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 32 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 72 cores / 144 threads instead of 8/16. 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 9565 Benchmark Check

Ryzen 7 3700X Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9565	Ryzen 7 3700X
1080p
low	171 FPS	200 FPS
medium	142 FPS	163 FPS
high	121 FPS	137 FPS
ultra	98 FPS	110 FPS
1440p
low	150 FPS	156 FPS
medium	120 FPS	121 FPS
high	98 FPS	100 FPS
ultra	81 FPS	80 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	84 FPS
medium	69 FPS	71 FPS
high	55 FPS	56 FPS
ultra	45 FPS	44 FPS

Open EPYC 9565 Open Ryzen 7 3700X

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9565	Ryzen 7 3700X
1080p
low	583 FPS	561 FPS
medium	511 FPS	525 FPS
high	415 FPS	428 FPS
ultra	361 FPS	383 FPS
1440p
low	492 FPS	545 FPS
medium	439 FPS	471 FPS
high	367 FPS	394 FPS
ultra	302 FPS	337 FPS
4K
low	306 FPS	350 FPS
medium	276 FPS	304 FPS
high	249 FPS	274 FPS
ultra	222 FPS	242 FPS

Open EPYC 9565 Open Ryzen 7 3700X

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9565	Ryzen 7 3700X
1080p
low	747 FPS	561 FPS
medium	634 FPS	561 FPS
high	575 FPS	561 FPS
ultra	506 FPS	561 FPS
1440p
low	561 FPS	561 FPS
medium	474 FPS	561 FPS
high	423 FPS	538 FPS
ultra	366 FPS	470 FPS
4K
low	405 FPS	499 FPS
medium	324 FPS	394 FPS
high	286 FPS	343 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	275 FPS

Open EPYC 9565 Open Ryzen 7 3700X

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9565	Ryzen 7 3700X
1080p
low	969 FPS	561 FPS
medium	875 FPS	561 FPS
high	752 FPS	561 FPS
ultra	676 FPS	561 FPS
1440p
low	780 FPS	561 FPS
medium	683 FPS	561 FPS
high	583 FPS	561 FPS
ultra	513 FPS	555 FPS
4K
low	551 FPS	561 FPS
medium	496 FPS	501 FPS
high	434 FPS	447 FPS
ultra	380 FPS	396 FPS

Open EPYC 9565 Open Ryzen 7 3700X

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9565 and Ryzen 7 3700X

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.

Ryzen 7 3700X

The Ryzen 7 3700X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 July 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 22,430 points. Launch price was $329.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9565 packs 72 cores / 144 threads, while the Ryzen 7 3700X offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the EPYC 9565 has 64 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the EPYC 9565 versus 4.4 GHz on the Ryzen 7 3700X — a 2.3% clock advantage for the Ryzen 7 3700X (base: 3.15 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The EPYC 9565 uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Ryzen 7 3700X uses Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) (7 nm, 12 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9565 scores 135,221 against the Ryzen 7 3700X's 22,430 — a 143.1% lead for the EPYC 9565. L3 cache: 384 MB (total) on the EPYC 9565 vs 32 MB on the Ryzen 7 3700X.

Feature	EPYC 9565	Ryzen 7 3700X
Cores / Threads	72 / 144+800%	8 / 16
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	4.4 GHz+2%
Base Clock	3.15 GHz	3.6 GHz+14%
L3 Cache	384 MB (total)+1100%	32 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)+100%	512K (per core)
Process	4 nm-43%	7 nm, 12 nm
Architecture	Turin (2024)	Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)
PassMark	135,221+503%	22,430

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9565 uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen 7 3700X uses AM4 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6000 on the EPYC 9565 versus DDR4-3200 on the Ryzen 7 3700X — the EPYC 9565 supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Ryzen 7 3700X supports up to 128 GB of RAM compared to 6 TB — 182.1% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9565) vs 2 (Ryzen 7 3700X). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9565) vs 24 (Ryzen 7 3700X) — the EPYC 9565 offers 104 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9565) and AMD 500 series,AMD 400 series,AMD 300 series (Ryzen 7 3700X).

Feature	EPYC 9565	Ryzen 7 3700X
Socket	SP5	AM4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6000+25%	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	6 TB+4700%	128 GB
RAM Channels	12+500%	2
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+433%	24

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9565) / not specified (Ryzen 7 3700X). Primary use case: EPYC 9565 targets Data Center / Cloud Computing. Direct competitor: EPYC 9565 rivals Xeon 6972P.

Feature	EPYC 9565	Ryzen 7 3700X
Integrated GPU	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V, SEV-SNP	—
Target Use	Data Center / Cloud Computing	—

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9565 launched at $10486 MSRP, while the Ryzen 7 3700X debuted at $329. On MSRP ($10486 vs $329), the Ryzen 7 3700X is $10157 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9565 delivers 12.9 pts/$ vs 68.2 pts/$ for the Ryzen 7 3700X — making the Ryzen 7 3700X the 136.4% better value option.