
EPYC 7371
Popular choices:

Ryzen 5 9600X
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 7371
2018Why buy it
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 32 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 28.
- ✅357.1% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 28) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 5 9600X across 44 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (15,000 vs 17,500).
- ❌207.7% higher power demand at 200W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on TR4 with DDR4, while Ryzen 5 9600X moves to AM5 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Ryzen 5 9600X can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Ryzen 5 9600X
2024Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +5.2% higher average FPS across 44 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 200W, a 135W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on AM5 with DDR5 support instead of TR4 and DDR4.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with AMD Radeon Graphics (2-core), while EPYC 7371 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (32 MB vs 64 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7371, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $279 MSRP, while EPYC 7371 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
EPYC 7371
2018Ryzen 5 9600X
2024Why buy it
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 32 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 28.
- ✅357.1% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 28) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +5.2% higher average FPS across 44 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 200W, a 135W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on AM5 with DDR5 support instead of TR4 and DDR4.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with AMD Radeon Graphics (2-core), while EPYC 7371 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 5 9600X across 44 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (15,000 vs 17,500).
- ❌207.7% higher power demand at 200W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on TR4 with DDR4, while Ryzen 5 9600X moves to AM5 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Ryzen 5 9600X can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (32 MB vs 64 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7371, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $279 MSRP, while EPYC 7371 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen 5 9600X better than EPYC 7371?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
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
| Preset | EPYC 7371 | Ryzen 5 9600X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 193 FPS | 264 FPS |
| medium | 168 FPS | 243 FPS |
| high | 136 FPS | 207 FPS |
| ultra | 108 FPS | 177 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 159 FPS | 225 FPS |
| medium | 132 FPS | 188 FPS |
| high | 102 FPS | 153 FPS |
| ultra | 82 FPS | 134 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 72 FPS | 156 FPS |
| medium | 64 FPS | 131 FPS |
| high | 50 FPS | 101 FPS |
| ultra | 40 FPS | 87 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | EPYC 7371 | Ryzen 5 9600X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 426 FPS | 546 FPS |
| medium | 383 FPS | 451 FPS |
| high | 321 FPS | 379 FPS |
| ultra | 269 FPS | 339 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 367 FPS | 469 FPS |
| medium | 334 FPS | 401 FPS |
| high | 283 FPS | 342 FPS |
| ultra | 230 FPS | 294 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 229 FPS | 294 FPS |
| medium | 211 FPS | 256 FPS |
| high | 190 FPS | 239 FPS |
| ultra | 159 FPS | 207 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | EPYC 7371 | Ryzen 5 9600X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 634 FPS | 750 FPS |
| medium | 531 FPS | 724 FPS |
| high | 490 FPS | 641 FPS |
| ultra | 416 FPS | 551 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 522 FPS | 724 FPS |
| medium | 436 FPS | 565 FPS |
| high | 393 FPS | 486 FPS |
| ultra | 336 FPS | 414 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 386 FPS | 471 FPS |
| medium | 310 FPS | 397 FPS |
| high | 280 FPS | 346 FPS |
| ultra | 227 FPS | 285 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | EPYC 7371 | Ryzen 5 9600X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 754 FPS | 750 FPS |
| medium | 754 FPS | 750 FPS |
| high | 688 FPS | 750 FPS |
| ultra | 609 FPS | 750 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 703 FPS | 750 FPS |
| medium | 617 FPS | 750 FPS |
| high | 530 FPS | 676 FPS |
| ultra | 455 FPS | 583 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 503 FPS | 577 FPS |
| medium | 452 FPS | 512 FPS |
| high | 399 FPS | 462 FPS |
| ultra | 345 FPS | 399 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 7371 and Ryzen 5 9600X

EPYC 7371
EPYC 7371
The EPYC 7371 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 16 November 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Naples (2017−2018) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: TR4. Thermal design power (TDP): 170 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 30,156 points. Launch price was $1,550.


Ryzen 5 9600X
Ryzen 5 9600X
The Ryzen 5 9600X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 8 August 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Granite Ridge (2024−2025) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.9 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: AM5. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 30,003 points. Launch price was $279.
Processing Power
The EPYC 7371 packs 16 cores / 32 threads, while the Ryzen 5 9600X offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the EPYC 7371 has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the EPYC 7371 versus 5.4 GHz on the Ryzen 5 9600X — a 34.8% clock advantage for the Ryzen 5 9600X (base: 3.1 GHz vs 3.9 GHz). The EPYC 7371 uses the Naples (2017−2018) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen 5 9600X uses Granite Ridge (2024−2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7371 scores 30,156 against the Ryzen 5 9600X's 30,003 — a 0.5% lead for the EPYC 7371. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 15,000 vs 17,500 (15.4% advantage for the Ryzen 5 9600X). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,216 vs 3,300, a 92.3% lead for the Ryzen 5 9600X that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 6,941 vs 15,000 (73.5% advantage for the Ryzen 5 9600X). L3 cache: 64 MB (total) on the EPYC 7371 vs 32 MB (total) on the Ryzen 5 9600X.
| Feature | EPYC 7371 | Ryzen 5 9600X |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 16 / 32+167% | 6 / 12 |
| Boost Clock | 3.8 GHz | 5.4 GHz+42% |
| Base Clock | 3.1 GHz | 3.9 GHz+26% |
| L3 Cache | 64 MB (total)+100% | 32 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 512K (per core) | 1 MB (per core)+100% |
| Process | 14 nm | 4 nm-71% |
| Architecture | Naples (2017−2018) | Granite Ridge (2024−2025) |
| PassMark | 30,156 | 30,003 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 15,000 | 17,500+17% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,216 | 3,300+171% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 6,941 | 15,000+116% |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 7371 uses the TR4 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Ryzen 5 9600X uses AM5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the EPYC 7371 versus DDR5-5600 on the Ryzen 5 9600X — the Ryzen 5 9600X supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7371 supports up to 2048 GB of RAM compared to 192 GB — 165.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 8 (EPYC 7371) vs 2 (Ryzen 5 9600X). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 7371) vs 28 (Ryzen 5 9600X) — the EPYC 7371 offers 100 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP3 platform (EPYC 7371) and X870E,X870,X670E,X670,B650E,B650 (Ryzen 5 9600X).
| Feature | EPYC 7371 | Ryzen 5 9600X |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | TR4 | AM5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 4.0 | PCIe 5.0+25% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | DDR5-5600+25% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 2048 GB+967% | 192 GB |
| RAM Channels | 8+300% | 2 |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128+357% | 28 |
Advanced Features
Both processors feature an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Only the Ryzen 5 9600X supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: AMD-V, SVM (EPYC 7371) vs AMD-V (Ryzen 5 9600X). The Ryzen 5 9600X includes integrated graphics (AMD Radeon Graphics (2-core)), while the EPYC 7371 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: EPYC 7371 targets High-frequency Server Workloads, Ryzen 5 9600X targets Gaming. Direct competitor: EPYC 7371 rivals Xeon Gold 6134; Ryzen 5 9600X rivals Intel Core i5-14600K.
| Feature | EPYC 7371 | Ryzen 5 9600X |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | AMD Radeon Graphics (2-core) |
| Unlocked | Yes | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | AMD-V, SVM | AMD-V |
| Target Use | High-frequency Server Workloads | Gaming |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












