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 9575F

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +44.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $3,022 less on MSRP ($11,791 MSRP vs $14,813 MSRP).
✅Delivers 15.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 12.5 vs 10.9 PassMark/$ ($11,791 MSRP vs $14,813 MSRP).
✅Draws 400W instead of 500W, a 100W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (147,718 vs 160,778).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (256 MB vs 384 MB).

EPYC 9965

2024

Why buy it

✅+8.8% higher PassMark.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 256 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9575F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.9 vs 12.5 PassMark/$ ($14,813 MSRP vs $11,791 MSRP).
❌25% higher power demand at 500W vs 400W.

EPYC 9575F

2024

EPYC 9965

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +44.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $3,022 less on MSRP ($11,791 MSRP vs $14,813 MSRP).
✅Delivers 15.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 12.5 vs 10.9 PassMark/$ ($11,791 MSRP vs $14,813 MSRP).
✅Draws 400W instead of 500W, a 100W reduction.

Why buy it

✅+8.8% higher PassMark.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 256 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (147,718 vs 160,778).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (256 MB vs 384 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9575F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.9 vs 12.5 PassMark/$ ($14,813 MSRP vs $11,791 MSRP).
❌25% higher power demand at 500W vs 400W.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9575F better than EPYC 9965?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, EPYC 9575F is ahead with a 44.5% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9965 pulls ahead with 8.8% better PassMark. EPYC 9965 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 9965 is the better fit. You are getting 8.8% better PassMark, backed by 192 cores and 384 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 9575F is the smarter buy today. EPYC 9575F is $3,022 cheaper on MSRP at $11,791 MSRP versus $14,813 MSRP, and it gives you a 44.5% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that EPYC 9965 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 8.8% better PassMark. It is also 15.4% better value on MSRP (12.5 vs 10.9 PassMark/$), 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 9965 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 50% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 256 MB) and more multi-core headroom with 192 cores / 384 threads instead of 64/128. 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 9575F Benchmark Check

EPYC 9965 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9575F	EPYC 9965
1080p
low	303 FPS	192 FPS
medium	280 FPS	156 FPS
high	232 FPS	126 FPS
ultra	196 FPS	98 FPS
1440p
low	268 FPS	158 FPS
medium	223 FPS	124 FPS
high	172 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	153 FPS	77 FPS
4K
low	186 FPS	72 FPS
medium	154 FPS	60 FPS
high	118 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	105 FPS	39 FPS

Open EPYC 9575F Open EPYC 9965

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9575F	EPYC 9965
1080p
low	797 FPS	274 FPS
medium	681 FPS	241 FPS
high	536 FPS	198 FPS
ultra	466 FPS	163 FPS
1440p
low	657 FPS	225 FPS
medium	585 FPS	202 FPS
high	475 FPS	171 FPS
ultra	384 FPS	137 FPS
4K
low	367 FPS	139 FPS
medium	332 FPS	128 FPS
high	306 FPS	115 FPS
ultra	268 FPS	96 FPS

Open EPYC 9575F Open EPYC 9965

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9575F	EPYC 9965
1080p
low	884 FPS	743 FPS
medium	721 FPS	610 FPS
high	652 FPS	556 FPS
ultra	553 FPS	481 FPS
1440p
low	689 FPS	594 FPS
medium	560 FPS	494 FPS
high	494 FPS	450 FPS
ultra	417 FPS	390 FPS
4K
low	487 FPS	430 FPS
medium	404 FPS	335 FPS
high	359 FPS	298 FPS
ultra	297 FPS	240 FPS

Open EPYC 9575F Open EPYC 9965

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9575F	EPYC 9965
1080p
low	1118 FPS	962 FPS
medium	1007 FPS	873 FPS
high	884 FPS	752 FPS
ultra	797 FPS	650 FPS
1440p
low	884 FPS	740 FPS
medium	778 FPS	648 FPS
high	683 FPS	554 FPS
ultra	595 FPS	476 FPS
4K
low	645 FPS	531 FPS
medium	575 FPS	475 FPS
high	511 FPS	417 FPS
ultra	437 FPS	360 FPS

Open EPYC 9575F Open EPYC 9965

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9575F and EPYC 9965

EPYC 9575F

The EPYC 9575F is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 5 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: 147,718 points. Launch price was $11,791.

EPYC 9965

The EPYC 9965 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 192 cores and 384 threads. Base frequency is 2.25 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 384 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 500 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 160,778 points. Launch price was $14,813.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9575F packs 64 cores / 128 threads, while the EPYC 9965 offers 192 cores / 384 threads — the EPYC 9965 has 128 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5 GHz on the EPYC 9575F versus 3.7 GHz on the EPYC 9965 — a 29.9% clock advantage for the EPYC 9575F (base: 3.3 GHz vs 2.25 GHz). Both are built on the Turin (2024) architecture using a 4 nm process. In PassMark, the EPYC 9575F scores 147,718 against the EPYC 9965's 160,778 — a 8.5% lead for the EPYC 9965. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9575F vs 384 MB (total) on the EPYC 9965.

Feature	EPYC 9575F	EPYC 9965
Cores / Threads	64 / 128	192 / 384+200%
Boost Clock	5 GHz+35%	3.7 GHz
Base Clock	3.3 GHz+47%	2.25 GHz
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)	384 MB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	1 MB (per core)
Process	4 nm	3 nm-25%
Architecture	Turin (2024)	Turin (2024)
PassMark	147,718	160,778+9%
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,520
Geekbench 6 Multi	29,308	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the SP5 socket with PCIe 5.0. Both support up to DDR5-6000 memory speed. Both support up to 6 TB of RAM. Both feature 12-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9575F) and SP5 (EPYC 9965).

Feature	EPYC 9575F	EPYC 9965
Socket	SP5	SP5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6000	DDR5-6000
Max RAM Capacity	6 TB	6 TB
RAM Channels	12	12
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128	128

🔧

Advanced Features

Both support AMD-V, SEV-SNP virtualization. Primary use case: EPYC 9575F targets Data Center / High Frequency, EPYC 9965 targets Data Center / High Density. Direct competitor: EPYC 9575F rivals Xeon 6952P; EPYC 9965 rivals Xeon 6980P.

Feature	EPYC 9575F	EPYC 9965
Integrated GPU	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V, SEV-SNP	AMD-V, SEV-SNP
Target Use	Data Center / High Frequency	Data Center / High Density

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9575F launched at $11791 MSRP, while the EPYC 9965 debuted at $14813. On MSRP ($11791 vs $14813), the EPYC 9575F is $3022 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9575F delivers 12.5 pts/$ vs 10.9 pts/$ for the EPYC 9965 — making the EPYC 9575F the 14.3% better value option.