EPYC 9755 vs EPYC 9845

AMD

EPYC 9755

128 Cores256 Thrd500 WWMax: 4.1 GHz2024

Popular choices:

VS
AMD

EPYC 9845

160 Cores320 Thrd390 WWMax: 3.7 GHz2024

Popular choices:

Performance Spectrum - CPU

About PassMark

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 9755

2024

Why buy it

  • Better for gaming: +14.8% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
  • +60% larger total L3 cache (512 MB vs 320 MB).
  • Costs $580 less on MSRP ($12,984 MSRP vs $13,564 MSRP).
  • Delivers 13.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 12.8 vs 11.3 PassMark/$ ($12,984 MSRP vs $13,564 MSRP).

Trade-offs

  • 28.2% higher power demand at 500W vs 390W.

EPYC 9845

2024

Why buy it

  • Draws 390W instead of 500W, a 110W reduction.

Trade-offs

  • Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9755 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
  • Lower PassMark (152,985 vs 166,328).
  • Smaller total L3 cache (320 MB vs 512 MB).
  • Lower PassMark per dollar, at 11.3 vs 12.8 PassMark/$ ($13,564 MSRP vs $12,984 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9755 better than EPYC 9845?
Yes. EPYC 9755 is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 14.8% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data and 8.7% better PassMark, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.
Which one is better for gaming?
If gaming is the priority, EPYC 9755 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 14.8% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests.
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9755 is the better fit. You are getting 8.7% better PassMark, backed by 128 cores and 256 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 60% larger total L3 cache (512 MB vs 320 MB).
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
EPYC 9755 is the smarter buy today. EPYC 9755 is $580 cheaper on MSRP at $12,984 MSRP versus $13,564 MSRP, and it gives you a 14.8% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 13.6% better value on MSRP (12.8 vs 11.3 PassMark/$), 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 9845 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.

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

PresetEPYC 9755EPYC 9845
1080p
low170 FPS192 FPS
medium141 FPS156 FPS
high120 FPS126 FPS
ultra95 FPS98 FPS
1440p
low148 FPS158 FPS
medium119 FPS124 FPS
high95 FPS96 FPS
ultra76 FPS77 FPS
4K
low69 FPS72 FPS
medium59 FPS60 FPS
high47 FPS47 FPS
ultra38 FPS39 FPS
Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

PresetEPYC 9755EPYC 9845
1080p
low581 FPS274 FPS
medium510 FPS241 FPS
high414 FPS198 FPS
ultra361 FPS163 FPS
1440p
low489 FPS225 FPS
medium437 FPS202 FPS
high365 FPS171 FPS
ultra302 FPS137 FPS
4K
low304 FPS139 FPS
medium275 FPS128 FPS
high247 FPS115 FPS
ultra221 FPS96 FPS
League of Legends

League of Legends

PresetEPYC 9755EPYC 9845
1080p
low741 FPS743 FPS
medium632 FPS610 FPS
high574 FPS556 FPS
ultra505 FPS481 FPS
1440p
low558 FPS594 FPS
medium473 FPS494 FPS
high423 FPS450 FPS
ultra366 FPS390 FPS
4K
low403 FPS430 FPS
medium324 FPS335 FPS
high286 FPS298 FPS
ultra229 FPS240 FPS
Valorant

Valorant

PresetEPYC 9755EPYC 9845
1080p
low915 FPS958 FPS
medium830 FPS869 FPS
high715 FPS746 FPS
ultra632 FPS646 FPS
1440p
low726 FPS739 FPS
medium633 FPS646 FPS
high542 FPS552 FPS
ultra469 FPS473 FPS
4K
low524 FPS530 FPS
medium468 FPS474 FPS
high411 FPS415 FPS
ultra352 FPS358 FPS

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9755 and EPYC 9845

AMD

EPYC 9755

The EPYC 9755 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 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 GHz. L3 cache: 512 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 500 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 166,328 points. Launch price was $12,984.

AMD

EPYC 9845

The EPYC 9845 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 160 cores and 320 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 320 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 390 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 152,985 points. Launch price was $13,564.

Processing Power

The EPYC 9755 packs 128 cores / 256 threads, while the EPYC 9845 offers 160 cores / 320 threads — the EPYC 9845 has 32 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.1 GHz on the EPYC 9755 versus 3.7 GHz on the EPYC 9845 — a 10.3% clock advantage for the EPYC 9755 (base: 2.7 GHz vs 2.1 GHz). Both are built on the Turin (2024) architecture using a 4 nm process. In PassMark, the EPYC 9755 scores 166,328 against the EPYC 9845's 152,985 — a 8.4% lead for the EPYC 9755. L3 cache: 512 MB (total) on the EPYC 9755 vs 320 MB (total) on the EPYC 9845.

FeatureEPYC 9755EPYC 9845
Cores / Threads
128 / 256
160 / 320+25%
Boost Clock
4.1 GHz+11%
3.7 GHz
Base Clock
2.7 GHz+29%
2.1 GHz
L3 Cache
512 MB (total)+60%
320 MB (total)
L2 Cache
1 MB (per core)
1 MB (per core)
Process
4 nm
3 nm-25%
Architecture
Turin (2024)
Turin (2024)
PassMark
166,328+9%
152,985
Geekbench 6 Single
2,800
Geekbench 6 Multi
29,300
🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the SP5 socket with PCIe 5.0. Both support up to DDR5-6000 memory speed. The EPYC 9755 supports up to 9 TB of RAM compared to 6 TB 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 12-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9755) and SP5 (EPYC 9845).

FeatureEPYC 9755EPYC 9845
Socket
SP5
SP5
PCIe Generation
PCIe 5.0
PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed
DDR5-6000
DDR5-6000
Max RAM Capacity
9 TB+50%
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 9755 targets Data Center / Cloud Computing, EPYC 9845 targets Data Center / AI Training. Direct competitor: EPYC 9755 rivals Xeon 6980P; EPYC 9845 rivals Xeon 6972P.

FeatureEPYC 9755EPYC 9845
Integrated GPU
No
No
Virtualization
AMD-V, SEV-SNP
AMD-V, SEV-SNP
Target Use
Data Center / Cloud Computing
Data Center / AI Training
💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9755 launched at $12984 MSRP, while the EPYC 9845 debuted at $13564. On MSRP ($12984 vs $13564), the EPYC 9755 is $580 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9755 delivers 12.8 pts/$ vs 11.3 pts/$ for the EPYC 9845 — making the EPYC 9755 the 12.7% better value option.

FeatureEPYC 9755EPYC 9845
MSRP
$12984-4%
$13564
Performance per Dollar
12.8+13%
11.3
Release Date
2024
2024