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

✅+30.1% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅Costs $1,193 less on MSRP ($5,306 MSRP vs $6,499 MSRP).
✅Delivers 23.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 18.0 vs 14.6 PassMark/$ ($5,306 MSRP vs $6,499 MSRP).
✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of sWRX8 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX across 42 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.8% higher average FPS across 42 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 280W instead of 320W, a 40W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (20,000 vs 26,020).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 14.6 vs 18.0 PassMark/$ ($6,499 MSRP vs $5,306 MSRP).
❌Older platform position on sWRX8 with DDR4, while EPYC 9375F moves to SP5 and DDR5.

EPYC 9375F

2024

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX

2022

Why buy it

✅+30.1% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅Costs $1,193 less on MSRP ($5,306 MSRP vs $6,499 MSRP).
✅Delivers 23.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 18.0 vs 14.6 PassMark/$ ($5,306 MSRP vs $6,499 MSRP).
✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of sWRX8 and DDR4.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.8% higher average FPS across 42 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 280W instead of 320W, a 40W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX across 42 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (20,000 vs 26,020).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 14.6 vs 18.0 PassMark/$ ($6,499 MSRP vs $5,306 MSRP).
❌Older platform position on sWRX8 with DDR4, while EPYC 9375F moves to SP5 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9375F better than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX is ahead with a 3.8% average FPS lead across 42 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9375F pulls ahead with 30.1% better Geekbench multi-core.

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 30.1% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 32 cores and 64 threads.

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

EPYC 9375F is the smarter buy today. EPYC 9375F is $1,193 cheaper on MSRP at $5,306 MSRP versus $6,499 MSRP, and it gives you 30.1% better Geekbench multi-core. The trade-off is that Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 3.8% average FPS lead across 42 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 23.8% better value on MSRP (18.0 vs 14.6 PassMark/$), 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?

EPYC 9375F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2022), a healthier platform with SP5 and DDR5 instead of sWRX8, and more multi-core headroom with 32 cores / 64 threads instead of 64/128. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

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 PRO 5995WX Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9375F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX
1080p
low	315 FPS	205 FPS
medium	290 FPS	169 FPS
high	240 FPS	136 FPS
ultra	204 FPS	109 FPS
1440p
low	278 FPS	166 FPS
medium	230 FPS	131 FPS
high	178 FPS	104 FPS
ultra	158 FPS	86 FPS
4K
low	191 FPS	90 FPS
medium	157 FPS	77 FPS
high	120 FPS	60 FPS
ultra	107 FPS	49 FPS

Open EPYC 9375F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9375F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX
1080p
low	725 FPS	760 FPS
medium	618 FPS	648 FPS
high	485 FPS	510 FPS
ultra	421 FPS	442 FPS
1440p
low	579 FPS	619 FPS
medium	510 FPS	540 FPS
high	419 FPS	444 FPS
ultra	341 FPS	361 FPS
4K
low	338 FPS	362 FPS
medium	300 FPS	318 FPS
high	270 FPS	286 FPS
ultra	239 FPS	253 FPS

Open EPYC 9375F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9375F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX
1080p
low	923 FPS	920 FPS
medium	748 FPS	775 FPS
high	675 FPS	712 FPS
ultra	572 FPS	631 FPS
1440p
low	724 FPS	666 FPS
medium	584 FPS	560 FPS
high	515 FPS	509 FPS
ultra	433 FPS	446 FPS
4K
low	511 FPS	475 FPS
medium	421 FPS	382 FPS
high	374 FPS	347 FPS
ultra	309 FPS	279 FPS

Open EPYC 9375F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9375F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX
1080p
low	1141 FPS	1160 FPS
medium	1015 FPS	1015 FPS
high	902 FPS	894 FPS
ultra	813 FPS	790 FPS
1440p
low	890 FPS	933 FPS
medium	784 FPS	809 FPS
high	688 FPS	709 FPS
ultra	600 FPS	613 FPS
4K
low	650 FPS	661 FPS
medium	579 FPS	588 FPS
high	515 FPS	522 FPS
ultra	437 FPS	437 FPS

Open EPYC 9375F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9375F and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX

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 PRO 5995WX

The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2022-03-08. It is based on the Chagall PRO (2022) architecture. It features 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.5 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm process technology. Socket: sWRX8. Thermal design power (TDP): 280 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 94,737 points. Launch price was $6,499.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9375F packs 32 cores / 64 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX offers 64 cores / 128 threads — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX has 32 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the EPYC 9375F versus 4.5 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX — a 6.5% clock advantage for the EPYC 9375F (base: 3.85 GHz vs 2.7 GHz). The EPYC 9375F uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX uses Chagall PRO (2022) (7 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9375F scores 95,768 against the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX's 94,737 — a 1.1% lead for the EPYC 9375F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,981 vs 1,500, a 66.1% lead for the EPYC 9375F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 26,020 vs 20,000 (26.2% advantage for the EPYC 9375F). L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9375F vs 256 MB on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX.

Feature	EPYC 9375F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX
Cores / Threads	32 / 64	64 / 128+100%
Boost Clock	4.8 GHz+7%	4.5 GHz
Base Clock	3.85 GHz+43%	2.7 GHz
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)	256 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)+100%	512K (per core)
Process	4 nm-43%	7 nm
Architecture	Turin (2024)	Chagall PRO (2022)
PassMark	95,768+1%	94,737
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	66,403
Geekbench 6 Single	2,981+99%	1,500
Geekbench 6 Multi	26,020+30%	20,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9375F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX uses sWRX8 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6000 on the EPYC 9375F versus DDR4-3200 on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX — the EPYC 9375F supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX supports up to 2048 GB of RAM compared to 6 TB — 198.8% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9375F) vs 8 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX). Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9375F) and WRX80 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX).

Feature	EPYC 9375F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX
Socket	SP5	sWRX8
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6000+25%	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	6 TB+200%	2048 GB
RAM Channels	12+50%	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128	128

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9375F) vs true (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX). Primary use case: EPYC 9375F targets Data Center / Frequency Optimized, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX targets Professional Workstation. Direct competitor: EPYC 9375F rivals Xeon 6766E; Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX rivals Xeon w9-3495X.

Feature	EPYC 9375F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX
Integrated GPU	No	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	AMD-V, SEV-SNP	true
Target Use	Data Center / Frequency Optimized	Professional Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9375F launched at $5306 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX debuted at $6499. On MSRP ($5306 vs $6499), the EPYC 9375F is $1193 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9375F delivers 18.0 pts/$ vs 14.6 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX — making the EPYC 9375F the 21.3% better value option.