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

2024

Why buy it

✅+0.1% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).
✅Draws 320W instead of 350W, a 30W reduction.
✅45.5% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 88) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (2,981 vs 3,200).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 18.0 vs 61.9 PassMark/$ ($5,306 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

✅+7.3% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Costs $3,807 less on MSRP ($1,499 MSRP vs $5,306 MSRP).
✅Delivers 243.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 61.9 vs 18.0 PassMark/$ ($1,499 MSRP vs $5,306 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (26,000 vs 26,020).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 256 MB).

EPYC 9375F

2024

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

2025

Why buy it

✅+0.1% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).
✅Draws 320W instead of 350W, a 30W reduction.
✅45.5% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 88) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅+7.3% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Costs $3,807 less on MSRP ($1,499 MSRP vs $5,306 MSRP).
✅Delivers 243.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 61.9 vs 18.0 PassMark/$ ($1,499 MSRP vs $5,306 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (2,981 vs 3,200).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 18.0 vs 61.9 PassMark/$ ($5,306 MSRP vs $1,499 MSRP).
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (26,000 vs 26,020).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 256 MB).

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen Threadripper 9960X better than EPYC 9375F?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Ryzen Threadripper 9960X is ahead with a 0.6% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9375F pulls ahead with 0.1% better Geekbench multi-core. EPYC 9375F 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 9375F is the better fit. You are getting 0.1% better Geekbench multi-core, 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 $3,807 cheaper on MSRP at $1,499 MSRP versus $5,306 MSRP, and it gives you a 0.6% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that EPYC 9375F is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.1% better Geekbench multi-core. It is also 243.0% better value on MSRP (61.9 vs 18.0 PassMark/$), 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 9375F Benchmark Check

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9375F	Ryzen Threadripper 9960X
1080p
low	315 FPS	314 FPS
medium	290 FPS	290 FPS
high	240 FPS	241 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	203 FPS
1440p
low	278 FPS	278 FPS
medium	230 FPS	231 FPS
high	178 FPS	179 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

Open EPYC 9375F Open Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9375F	Ryzen Threadripper 9960X
1080p
low	725 FPS	826 FPS
medium	618 FPS	704 FPS
high	485 FPS	548 FPS
ultra	421 FPS	474 FPS
1440p
low	579 FPS	677 FPS
medium	510 FPS	601 FPS
high	419 FPS	482 FPS
ultra	341 FPS	390 FPS
4K
low	338 FPS	378 FPS
medium	300 FPS	341 FPS
high	270 FPS	311 FPS
ultra	239 FPS	272 FPS

Open EPYC 9375F Open Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9375F	Ryzen Threadripper 9960X
1080p
low	923 FPS	893 FPS
medium	748 FPS	724 FPS
high	675 FPS	650 FPS
ultra	572 FPS	553 FPS
1440p
low	724 FPS	716 FPS
medium	584 FPS	581 FPS
high	515 FPS	509 FPS
ultra	433 FPS	428 FPS
4K
low	511 FPS	509 FPS
medium	421 FPS	420 FPS
high	374 FPS	376 FPS
ultra	309 FPS	312 FPS

Open EPYC 9375F Open Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9375F	Ryzen Threadripper 9960X
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	873 FPS
medium	784 FPS	769 FPS
high	688 FPS	675 FPS
ultra	600 FPS	588 FPS
4K
low	650 FPS	637 FPS
medium	579 FPS	568 FPS
high	515 FPS	505 FPS
ultra	437 FPS	437 FPS

Open EPYC 9375F Open Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9375F and Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

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 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 9375F packs 32 cores / 64 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the EPYC 9375F has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the EPYC 9375F versus 5.3 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X — a 9.9% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X (base: 3.85 GHz vs 4.2 GHz). The EPYC 9375F uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X uses Shimada Peak (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9375F scores 95,768 against the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X's 92,808 — a 3.1% lead for the EPYC 9375F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,981 vs 3,200, a 7.1% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 26,020 vs 26,000 (0.1% advantage for the EPYC 9375F). L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9375F vs 128 MB (total) on the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X.

Feature	EPYC 9375F	Ryzen Threadripper 9960X
Cores / Threads	32 / 64+33%	24 / 48
Boost Clock	4.8 GHz	5.3 GHz+10%
Base Clock	3.85 GHz	4.2 GHz+9%
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	95,768+3%	92,808
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	41,000
Geekbench 6 Single	2,981	3,200+7%
Geekbench 6 Multi	26,020	26,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9375F 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 9375F) vs 4 (Ryzen Threadripper 9960X). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9375F) vs 88 (Ryzen Threadripper 9960X) — the EPYC 9375F offers 40 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9375F) and TRX50 (Ryzen Threadripper 9960X).

Feature	EPYC 9375F	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 9375F) vs true (Ryzen Threadripper 9960X). Primary use case: EPYC 9375F targets Data Center / Frequency Optimized, Ryzen Threadripper 9960X targets Content Creation / Rendering. Direct competitor: EPYC 9375F rivals Xeon 6766E; Ryzen Threadripper 9960X rivals Xeon w7-3555.

Feature	EPYC 9375F	Ryzen Threadripper 9960X
Integrated GPU	No	No
AVX-512	—	Yes
Virtualization	AMD-V, SEV-SNP	true
Target Use	Data Center / Frequency Optimized	Content Creation / Rendering

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9375F launched at $5306 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X debuted at $1499. On MSRP ($5306 vs $1499), the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X is $3807 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9375F delivers 18.0 pts/$ vs 61.9 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X — making the Ryzen Threadripper 9960X the 109.7% better value option.