
EPYC 9375F
Popular choices:

Ryzen Threadripper 7970X
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 9375F
2024Why buy it
- ✅+2.8% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).
- ✅Draws 320W instead of 350W, a 30W reduction.
- ✅39.1% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 92) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 18.0 vs 39.7 PassMark/$ ($5,306 MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).
- ❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.
Ryzen Threadripper 7970X
2023Why buy it
- ✅Costs $2,807 less on MSRP ($2,499 MSRP vs $5,306 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 119.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 39.7 vs 18.0 PassMark/$ ($2,499 MSRP vs $5,306 MSRP).
- ✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (2,900 vs 2,981).
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (24,000 vs 26,020).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 256 MB).
EPYC 9375F
2024Ryzen Threadripper 7970X
2023Why buy it
- ✅+2.8% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).
- ✅Draws 320W instead of 350W, a 30W reduction.
- ✅39.1% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 92) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Why buy it
- ✅Costs $2,807 less on MSRP ($2,499 MSRP vs $5,306 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 119.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 39.7 vs 18.0 PassMark/$ ($2,499 MSRP vs $5,306 MSRP).
- ✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 18.0 vs 39.7 PassMark/$ ($5,306 MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).
- ❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (2,900 vs 2,981).
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (24,000 vs 26,020).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 256 MB).
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 9375F better than Ryzen Threadripper 7970X?
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 9375F | Ryzen Threadripper 7970X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 315 FPS | 314 FPS |
| medium | 290 FPS | 289 FPS |
| high | 240 FPS | 240 FPS |
| ultra | 204 FPS | 203 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 278 FPS | 278 FPS |
| medium | 230 FPS | 231 FPS |
| high | 178 FPS | 178 FPS |
| ultra | 158 FPS | 158 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 191 FPS | 191 FPS |
| medium | 157 FPS | 158 FPS |
| high | 120 FPS | 121 FPS |
| ultra | 107 FPS | 107 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | EPYC 9375F | Ryzen Threadripper 7970X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 725 FPS | 807 FPS |
| medium | 618 FPS | 688 FPS |
| high | 485 FPS | 535 FPS |
| ultra | 421 FPS | 467 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 579 FPS | 666 FPS |
| medium | 510 FPS | 591 FPS |
| high | 419 FPS | 474 FPS |
| ultra | 341 FPS | 384 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 338 FPS | 372 FPS |
| medium | 300 FPS | 335 FPS |
| high | 270 FPS | 306 FPS |
| ultra | 239 FPS | 268 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | EPYC 9375F | Ryzen Threadripper 7970X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 923 FPS | 891 FPS |
| medium | 748 FPS | 723 FPS |
| high | 675 FPS | 649 FPS |
| ultra | 572 FPS | 552 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 724 FPS | 714 FPS |
| medium | 584 FPS | 580 FPS |
| high | 515 FPS | 508 FPS |
| ultra | 433 FPS | 427 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 511 FPS | 508 FPS |
| medium | 421 FPS | 419 FPS |
| high | 374 FPS | 375 FPS |
| ultra | 309 FPS | 311 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | EPYC 9375F | Ryzen Threadripper 7970X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 1141 FPS | 1116 FPS |
| medium | 1015 FPS | 1002 FPS |
| high | 902 FPS | 879 FPS |
| ultra | 813 FPS | 792 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 890 FPS | 872 FPS |
| medium | 784 FPS | 768 FPS |
| high | 688 FPS | 674 FPS |
| ultra | 600 FPS | 587 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 650 FPS | 636 FPS |
| medium | 579 FPS | 568 FPS |
| high | 515 FPS | 504 FPS |
| ultra | 437 FPS | 437 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9375F and Ryzen Threadripper 7970X

EPYC 9375F
EPYC 9375F
The EPYC 9375F is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 3.85 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 320 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 95,768 points. Launch price was $5,306.


Ryzen Threadripper 7970X
Ryzen Threadripper 7970X
The Ryzen Threadripper 7970X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 19 October 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Storm Peak (2023) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 4 GHz, with boost up to 5.3 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: sTR5. Thermal design power (TDP): 350 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 99,152 points. Launch price was $2,499.
Processing Power
Both the EPYC 9375F and Ryzen Threadripper 7970X share an identical 32-core/64-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the EPYC 9375F versus 5.3 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper 7970X — a 9.9% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper 7970X (base: 3.85 GHz vs 4 GHz). The EPYC 9375F uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper 7970X uses Storm Peak (2023) (5 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9375F scores 95,768 against the Ryzen Threadripper 7970X's 99,152 — a 3.5% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper 7970X. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,981 vs 2,900, a 2.8% lead for the EPYC 9375F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 26,020 vs 24,000 (8.1% advantage for the EPYC 9375F). L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9375F vs 128 MB (total) on the Ryzen Threadripper 7970X.
| Feature | EPYC 9375F | Ryzen Threadripper 7970X |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 32 / 64 | 32 / 64 |
| Boost Clock | 4.8 GHz | 5.3 GHz+10% |
| Base Clock | 3.85 GHz | 4 GHz+4% |
| L3 Cache | 256 MB (total)+100% | 128 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | 4 nm-20% | 5 nm |
| Architecture | Turin (2024) | Storm Peak (2023) |
| PassMark | 95,768 | 99,152+4% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 75,000 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,981+3% | 2,900 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 26,020+8% | 24,000 |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 9375F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper 7970X uses sTR5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-6000 memory speed. The Ryzen Threadripper 7970X supports up to 1024 GB of RAM compared to 6 TB — 197.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9375F) vs 4 (Ryzen Threadripper 7970X). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9375F) vs 92 (Ryzen Threadripper 7970X) — the EPYC 9375F offers 36 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9375F) and TRX50 (Ryzen Threadripper 7970X).
| Feature | EPYC 9375F | Ryzen Threadripper 7970X |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP5 | sTR5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-6000 | DDR5-5200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 6 TB+500% | 1024 GB |
| RAM Channels | 12+200% | 4 |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128+39% | 92 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization support: AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9375F) vs AMD-V (Ryzen Threadripper 7970X). Primary use case: EPYC 9375F targets Data Center / Frequency Optimized, Ryzen Threadripper 7970X targets High-End Workstation. Direct competitor: EPYC 9375F rivals Xeon 6766E; Ryzen Threadripper 7970X rivals Xeon w7-2495X.
| Feature | EPYC 9375F | Ryzen Threadripper 7970X |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | — | None |
| Unlocked | — | Yes |
| AVX-512 | — | Yes |
| Virtualization | AMD-V, SEV-SNP | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Data Center / Frequency Optimized | High-End Workstation |
Value Analysis
The EPYC 9375F launched at $5306 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper 7970X debuted at $2499. On MSRP ($5306 vs $2499), the Ryzen Threadripper 7970X is $2807 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9375F delivers 18.0 pts/$ vs 39.7 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper 7970X — making the Ryzen Threadripper 7970X the 74.9% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 9375F | Ryzen Threadripper 7970X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $5306 | $2499-53% |
| Performance per Dollar | 18.0 | 39.7+121% |
| Release Date | 2024 | 2023 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












