
EPYC 7343
Popular choices:

Ryzen AI Max PRO 390
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 7343
2021Why buy it
- ✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 64 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 AI Max PRO 390 across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 27.9 vs 72.0 PassMark/$ ($1,565 MSRP vs $600 MSRP).
- ❌245.5% higher power demand at 190W vs 55W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 moves to FP11 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Ryzen AI Max PRO 390
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +40.6% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $965 less on MSRP ($600 MSRP vs $1,565 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 158.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 72.0 vs 27.9 PassMark/$ ($600 MSRP vs $1,565 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 190W, a 135W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FP11 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (43,174 vs 43,644).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (64 MB vs 128 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7343, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 7343
2021Ryzen AI Max PRO 390
2025Why buy it
- ✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 64 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: +40.6% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $965 less on MSRP ($600 MSRP vs $1,565 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 158.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 72.0 vs 27.9 PassMark/$ ($600 MSRP vs $1,565 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 190W, a 135W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FP11 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 27.9 vs 72.0 PassMark/$ ($1,565 MSRP vs $600 MSRP).
- ❌245.5% higher power demand at 190W vs 55W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 moves to FP11 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (43,174 vs 43,644).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (64 MB vs 128 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7343, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 better than EPYC 7343?
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 7343 | Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 167 FPS | 286 FPS |
| medium | 137 FPS | 253 FPS |
| high | 116 FPS | 213 FPS |
| ultra | 91 FPS | 185 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 147 FPS | 266 FPS |
| medium | 118 FPS | 211 FPS |
| high | 95 FPS | 165 FPS |
| ultra | 75 FPS | 147 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 69 FPS | 184 FPS |
| medium | 59 FPS | 147 FPS |
| high | 46 FPS | 108 FPS |
| ultra | 38 FPS | 97 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | EPYC 7343 | Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 506 FPS | 778 FPS |
| medium | 442 FPS | 656 FPS |
| high | 354 FPS | 517 FPS |
| ultra | 288 FPS | 459 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 415 FPS | 654 FPS |
| medium | 372 FPS | 572 FPS |
| high | 307 FPS | 463 FPS |
| ultra | 242 FPS | 378 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 256 FPS | 368 FPS |
| medium | 233 FPS | 326 FPS |
| high | 205 FPS | 300 FPS |
| ultra | 170 FPS | 264 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | EPYC 7343 | Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 665 FPS | 1021 FPS |
| medium | 555 FPS | 783 FPS |
| high | 518 FPS | 685 FPS |
| ultra | 451 FPS | 580 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 504 FPS | 818 FPS |
| medium | 419 FPS | 635 FPS |
| high | 385 FPS | 551 FPS |
| ultra | 333 FPS | 469 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 372 FPS | 565 FPS |
| medium | 290 FPS | 460 FPS |
| high | 260 FPS | 409 FPS |
| ultra | 209 FPS | 342 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | EPYC 7343 | Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 936 FPS | 1079 FPS |
| medium | 856 FPS | 1015 FPS |
| high | 734 FPS | 912 FPS |
| ultra | 648 FPS | 811 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 747 FPS | 895 FPS |
| medium | 654 FPS | 788 FPS |
| high | 558 FPS | 689 FPS |
| ultra | 477 FPS | 605 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 536 FPS | 658 FPS |
| medium | 481 FPS | 582 FPS |
| high | 421 FPS | 514 FPS |
| ultra | 364 FPS | 437 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 7343 and Ryzen AI Max PRO 390

EPYC 7343
EPYC 7343
The EPYC 7343 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 15 March 2021 (4 years ago). It is based on the Milan (2021−2023) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm+ process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 190 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 43,644 points. Launch price was $1,565.


Ryzen AI Max PRO 390
Ryzen AI Max PRO 390
The Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 6 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Strix Halo (2025) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FP11. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 43,174 points. Launch price was $499.
Processing Power
The EPYC 7343 packs 16 cores / 32 threads, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the EPYC 7343 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.9 GHz on the EPYC 7343 versus 5 GHz on the Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 — a 24.7% clock advantage for the Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 (base: 3.2 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The EPYC 7343 uses the Milan (2021−2023) architecture (7 nm+), while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 uses Strix Halo (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7343 scores 43,644 against the Ryzen AI Max PRO 390's 43,174 — a 1.1% lead for the EPYC 7343. L3 cache: 128 MB (total) on the EPYC 7343 vs 64 MB (total) on the Ryzen AI Max PRO 390.
| Feature | EPYC 7343 | Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 16 / 32+33% | 12 / 24 |
| Boost Clock | 3.9 GHz | 5 GHz+28% |
| Base Clock | 3.2 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 128 MB (total)+100% | 64 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB (per core) | 1 MB (per core)+100% |
| Process | 7 nm+ | 4 nm-43% |
| Architecture | Milan (2021−2023) | Strix Halo (2025) |
| PassMark | 43,644+1% | 43,174 |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 7343 uses the SP3 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 uses FP11 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 3200 on the EPYC 7343 versus 8000 on the Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 — the Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 supports 85.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7343 supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 128 — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 8 (EPYC 7343) vs 4 (Ryzen AI Max PRO 390). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 7343) vs 28 (Ryzen AI Max PRO 390) — the EPYC 7343 offers 100 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP3 (EPYC 7343) and Strix Halo (Ryzen AI Max PRO 390).
| Feature | EPYC 7343 | Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP3 | FP11 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 4.0 | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | 3200 | 8000+150% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4096+3100% | 128 |
| RAM Channels | 8+100% | 4 |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128+357% | 28 |
Advanced Features
Only the Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Both support VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V virtualization. The Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 includes integrated graphics (AMD Radeon 8050S), while the EPYC 7343 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: EPYC 7343 rivals Xeon Gold 6248; Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 rivals Apple M4 Max.
| Feature | EPYC 7343 | Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | None | AMD Radeon 8050S |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | Yes | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V | VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V |
Value Analysis
The EPYC 7343 launched at $1565 MSRP, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 debuted at $600. On MSRP ($1565 vs $600), the Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 is $965 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 7343 delivers 27.9 pts/$ vs 72.0 pts/$ for the Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 — making the Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 the 88.3% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 7343 | Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1565 | $600-62% |
| Performance per Dollar | 27.9 | 72.0+158% |
| Release Date | 2021 | 2025 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












