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 9355P

2024

Why buy it

✅+4.8% higher PassMark.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).
✅Draws 280W instead of 350W, a 70W reduction.
✅45.5% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 88) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper 9960X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 32.4 vs 61.9 PassMark/$ ($2,998 MSRP vs $1,499 MSRP).
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +16.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $1,499 less on MSRP ($1,499 MSRP vs $2,998 MSRP).
✅Delivers 90.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 61.9 vs 32.4 PassMark/$ ($1,499 MSRP vs $2,998 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (92,808 vs 97,249).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 256 MB).
❌25% higher power demand at 350W vs 280W.

EPYC 9355P

2024

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

2025

Why buy it

✅+4.8% higher PassMark.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).
✅Draws 280W instead of 350W, a 70W reduction.
✅45.5% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 88) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +16.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $1,499 less on MSRP ($1,499 MSRP vs $2,998 MSRP).
✅Delivers 90.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 61.9 vs 32.4 PassMark/$ ($1,499 MSRP vs $2,998 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper 9960X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 32.4 vs 61.9 PassMark/$ ($2,998 MSRP vs $1,499 MSRP).
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (92,808 vs 97,249).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 256 MB).
❌25% higher power demand at 350W vs 280W.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen Threadripper 9960X better than EPYC 9355P?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Ryzen Threadripper 9960X is ahead with a 16.9% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9355P pulls ahead with 4.8% better PassMark. EPYC 9355P also has the bigger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9355P is the better fit. You are getting 4.8% better PassMark, backed by 32 cores and 64 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X is the smarter buy today. Ryzen Threadripper 9960X is $1,499 cheaper on MSRP at $1,499 MSRP versus $2,998 MSRP, and it gives you a 16.9% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that EPYC 9355P is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 4.8% better PassMark. It is also 90.9% better value on MSRP (61.9 vs 32.4 PassMark/$), 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?

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2024) and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. 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 9355P Benchmark Check

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9355P	Ryzen Threadripper 9960X
1080p
low	174 FPS	314 FPS
medium	144 FPS	290 FPS
high	124 FPS	241 FPS
ultra	101 FPS	203 FPS
1440p
low	152 FPS	278 FPS
medium	123 FPS	231 FPS
high	101 FPS	179 FPS
ultra	84 FPS	158 FPS
4K
low	85 FPS	191 FPS
medium	73 FPS	158 FPS
high	58 FPS	121 FPS
ultra	48 FPS	107 FPS

Open EPYC 9355P Open Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9355P	Ryzen Threadripper 9960X
1080p
low	658 FPS	826 FPS
medium	566 FPS	704 FPS
high	459 FPS	548 FPS
ultra	397 FPS	474 FPS
1440p
low	548 FPS	677 FPS
medium	483 FPS	601 FPS
high	404 FPS	482 FPS
ultra	328 FPS	390 FPS
4K
low	333 FPS	378 FPS
medium	295 FPS	341 FPS
high	268 FPS	311 FPS
ultra	236 FPS	272 FPS

Open EPYC 9355P Open Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9355P	Ryzen Threadripper 9960X
1080p
low	752 FPS	893 FPS
medium	638 FPS	724 FPS
high	593 FPS	650 FPS
ultra	521 FPS	553 FPS
1440p
low	561 FPS	716 FPS
medium	474 FPS	581 FPS
high	434 FPS	509 FPS
ultra	376 FPS	428 FPS
4K
low	405 FPS	509 FPS
medium	326 FPS	420 FPS
high	288 FPS	376 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	312 FPS

Open EPYC 9355P Open Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9355P	Ryzen Threadripper 9960X
1080p
low	1018 FPS	1116 FPS
medium	914 FPS	1002 FPS
high	788 FPS	879 FPS
ultra	711 FPS	792 FPS
1440p
low	813 FPS	873 FPS
medium	707 FPS	769 FPS
high	606 FPS	675 FPS
ultra	535 FPS	588 FPS
4K
low	577 FPS	637 FPS
medium	512 FPS	568 FPS
high	449 FPS	505 FPS
ultra	394 FPS	437 FPS

Open EPYC 9355P Open Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9355P and Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

EPYC 9355P

The EPYC 9355P 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 3.55 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 280 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 97,249 points. Launch price was $2,998.

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

The Ryzen Threadripper 9960X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 30 July 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Shimada Peak (2025) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 4.2 GHz, with boost up to 5.3 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: sTR5. Thermal design power (TDP): 350 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 92,808 points. Launch price was $1,499.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9355P packs 32 cores / 64 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the EPYC 9355P has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the EPYC 9355P versus 5.3 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X — a 18.6% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X (base: 3.55 GHz vs 4.2 GHz). The EPYC 9355P uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X uses Shimada Peak (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9355P scores 97,249 against the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X's 92,808 — a 4.7% lead for the EPYC 9355P. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9355P vs 128 MB (total) on the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X.

Feature	EPYC 9355P	Ryzen Threadripper 9960X
Cores / Threads	32 / 64+33%	24 / 48
Boost Clock	4.4 GHz	5.3 GHz+20%
Base Clock	3.55 GHz	4.2 GHz+18%
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)+100%	128 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	1 MB (per core)
Process	4 nm	4 nm
Architecture	Turin (2024)	Shimada Peak (2025)
PassMark	97,249+5%	92,808
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	41,000
Geekbench 6 Single	—	3,200
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	26,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9355P uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X uses sTR5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-6000 memory speed. The Ryzen Threadripper 9960X supports up to 1024 GB of RAM compared to 6 TB — 197.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9355P) vs 4 (Ryzen Threadripper 9960X). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9355P) vs 88 (Ryzen Threadripper 9960X) — the EPYC 9355P offers 40 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9355P) and TRX50 (Ryzen Threadripper 9960X).

Feature	EPYC 9355P	Ryzen Threadripper 9960X
Socket	SP5	sTR5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6000	DDR5-6400
Max RAM Capacity	6 TB+500%	1024 GB
RAM Channels	12+200%	4
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+45%	88

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9355P) vs true (Ryzen Threadripper 9960X). Primary use case: EPYC 9355P targets Data Center / Single Socket, Ryzen Threadripper 9960X targets Content Creation / Rendering. Direct competitor: EPYC 9355P rivals Xeon 6740P; Ryzen Threadripper 9960X rivals Xeon w7-3555.

Feature	EPYC 9355P	Ryzen Threadripper 9960X
Integrated GPU	No	No
AVX-512	—	Yes
Virtualization	AMD-V, SEV-SNP	true
Target Use	Data Center / Single Socket	Content Creation / Rendering

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9355P launched at $2998 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X debuted at $1499. On MSRP ($2998 vs $1499), the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X is $1499 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9355P delivers 32.4 pts/$ vs 61.9 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X — making the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X the 62.5% better value option.