
EPYC 9654
Popular choices:

Ryzen Threadripper 9970X
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 9654
2022Why buy it
- ✅+200% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 128 MB).
- ✅39.1% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 92) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper 9970X across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (20,000 vs 29,244).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.1 vs 43.4 PassMark/$ ($11,805 MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).
Ryzen Threadripper 9970X
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +23.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $9,306 less on MSRP ($2,499 MSRP vs $11,805 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 329.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 43.4 vs 10.1 PassMark/$ ($2,499 MSRP vs $11,805 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 384 MB).
EPYC 9654
2022Ryzen Threadripper 9970X
2025Why buy it
- ✅+200% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 128 MB).
- ✅39.1% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 92) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +23.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $9,306 less on MSRP ($2,499 MSRP vs $11,805 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 329.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 43.4 vs 10.1 PassMark/$ ($2,499 MSRP vs $11,805 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper 9970X across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (20,000 vs 29,244).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.1 vs 43.4 PassMark/$ ($11,805 MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 384 MB).
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen Threadripper 9970X better than EPYC 9654?
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 9654 | Ryzen Threadripper 9970X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 170 FPS | 314 FPS |
| medium | 141 FPS | 289 FPS |
| high | 122 FPS | 240 FPS |
| ultra | 96 FPS | 203 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 148 FPS | 278 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 231 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 178 FPS |
| ultra | 77 FPS | 158 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 70 FPS | 191 FPS |
| medium | 59 FPS | 158 FPS |
| high | 47 FPS | 121 FPS |
| ultra | 39 FPS | 107 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | EPYC 9654 | Ryzen Threadripper 9970X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 524 FPS | 818 FPS |
| medium | 457 FPS | 697 FPS |
| high | 365 FPS | 542 FPS |
| ultra | 296 FPS | 472 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 431 FPS | 674 FPS |
| medium | 385 FPS | 599 FPS |
| high | 317 FPS | 480 FPS |
| ultra | 250 FPS | 388 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 265 FPS | 377 FPS |
| medium | 241 FPS | 339 FPS |
| high | 211 FPS | 310 FPS |
| ultra | 176 FPS | 271 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | EPYC 9654 | Ryzen Threadripper 9970X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 671 FPS | 891 FPS |
| medium | 560 FPS | 723 FPS |
| high | 522 FPS | 649 FPS |
| ultra | 454 FPS | 552 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 511 FPS | 714 FPS |
| medium | 425 FPS | 580 FPS |
| high | 389 FPS | 508 FPS |
| ultra | 337 FPS | 427 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 376 FPS | 508 FPS |
| medium | 293 FPS | 419 FPS |
| high | 262 FPS | 375 FPS |
| ultra | 210 FPS | 311 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | EPYC 9654 | Ryzen Threadripper 9970X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 902 FPS | 1116 FPS |
| medium | 822 FPS | 1002 FPS |
| high | 708 FPS | 879 FPS |
| ultra | 623 FPS | 792 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 724 FPS | 872 FPS |
| medium | 631 FPS | 768 FPS |
| high | 540 FPS | 674 FPS |
| ultra | 461 FPS | 587 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 519 FPS | 636 FPS |
| medium | 464 FPS | 568 FPS |
| high | 407 FPS | 504 FPS |
| ultra | 350 FPS | 437 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9654 and Ryzen Threadripper 9970X

EPYC 9654
EPYC 9654
The EPYC 9654 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 November 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture. It features 96 cores and 192 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 384 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm, 6 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 360 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 119,246 points. Launch price was $11,805.


Ryzen Threadripper 9970X
Ryzen Threadripper 9970X
The Ryzen Threadripper 9970X 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 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 4 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 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: 108,377 points. Launch price was $2,499.
Processing Power
The EPYC 9654 packs 96 cores / 192 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper 9970X offers 32 cores / 64 threads — the EPYC 9654 has 64 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the EPYC 9654 versus 5.4 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper 9970X — a 37.4% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper 9970X (base: 2.4 GHz vs 4 GHz). The EPYC 9654 uses the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture (5 nm, 6 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper 9970X uses Shimada Peak (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9654 scores 119,246 against the Ryzen Threadripper 9970X's 108,377 — a 9.6% lead for the EPYC 9654. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,250 vs 3,220, a 88.1% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper 9970X that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 20,000 vs 29,244 (37.5% advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper 9970X). L3 cache: 384 MB (total) on the EPYC 9654 vs 128 MB (total) on the Ryzen Threadripper 9970X.
| Feature | EPYC 9654 | Ryzen Threadripper 9970X |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 96 / 192+200% | 32 / 64 |
| Boost Clock | 3.7 GHz | 5.4 GHz+46% |
| Base Clock | 2.4 GHz | 4 GHz+67% |
| L3 Cache | 384 MB (total)+200% | 128 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | 5 nm, 6 nm | 4 nm-20% |
| Architecture | Genoa (2022−2023) | Shimada Peak (2025) |
| PassMark | 119,246+10% | 108,377 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 76,136 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,250 | 3,220+158% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 20,000 | 29,244+46% |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 9654 uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper 9970X uses sTR5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-4800 memory speed. The EPYC 9654 supports up to 6 TB of RAM compared to 1 TB — 142.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9654) vs 4 (Ryzen Threadripper 9970X). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9654) vs 92 (Ryzen Threadripper 9970X) — the EPYC 9654 offers 36 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9654) and TRX50 (Ryzen Threadripper 9970X).
| Feature | EPYC 9654 | Ryzen Threadripper 9970X |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP5 | sTR5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-4800 | DDR5-6400 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 6 TB+500% | 1 TB |
| RAM Channels | 12+200% | 4 |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128+39% | 92 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization support: AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9654) vs AMD-V, SVM (Ryzen Threadripper 9970X). Primary use case: EPYC 9654 targets Data Center, Ryzen Threadripper 9970X targets HEDT / Workstation. Direct competitor: EPYC 9654 rivals Xeon 8592+; Ryzen Threadripper 9970X rivals Xeon w7-3465X.
| Feature | EPYC 9654 | Ryzen Threadripper 9970X |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | — | Yes |
| AVX-512 | — | Yes |
| Virtualization | AMD-V, SEV-SNP | AMD-V, SVM |
| Target Use | Data Center | HEDT / Workstation |
Value Analysis
The EPYC 9654 launched at $11805 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper 9970X debuted at $2499. On MSRP ($11805 vs $2499), the Ryzen Threadripper 9970X is $9306 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9654 delivers 10.1 pts/$ vs 43.4 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper 9970X — making the Ryzen Threadripper 9970X the 124.4% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 9654 | Ryzen Threadripper 9970X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $11805 | $2499-79% |
| Performance per Dollar | 10.1 | 43.4+330% |
| Release Date | 2022 | 2025 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












