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 9175F

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.2% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 320W instead of 350W, a 30W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (65,894 vs 67,561).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.5 vs 157.5 PassMark/$ ($4,256 MSRP vs $429 MSRP).

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX

2025

Why buy it

✅+2.5% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $3,827 less on MSRP ($429 MSRP vs $4,256 MSRP).
✅Delivers 917.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 157.5 vs 15.5 PassMark/$ ($429 MSRP vs $4,256 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9175F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.

EPYC 9175F

2024

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.2% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 320W instead of 350W, a 30W reduction.

Why buy it

✅+2.5% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $3,827 less on MSRP ($429 MSRP vs $4,256 MSRP).
✅Delivers 917.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 157.5 vs 15.5 PassMark/$ ($429 MSRP vs $4,256 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (65,894 vs 67,561).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.5 vs 157.5 PassMark/$ ($4,256 MSRP vs $429 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9175F across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX better than EPYC 9175F?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, EPYC 9175F is ahead with a 7.2% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX pulls ahead with 2.5% better PassMark. EPYC 9175F also has the bigger cache pool with 700% larger total L3 cache (512 MB vs 64 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX is the better fit. You are getting 2.5% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads.

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

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX is the smarter buy today. Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX is $3,827 cheaper on MSRP at $429 MSRP versus $4,256 MSRP, and it gives you 2.5% better PassMark. The trade-off is that EPYC 9175F is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 7.2% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 917.2% better value on MSRP (157.5 vs 15.5 PassMark/$), 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 PRO 9955WX is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2024) and more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 32 threads instead of 16/32. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

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 9175F Benchmark Check

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9175F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX
1080p
low	300 FPS	297 FPS
medium	273 FPS	270 FPS
high	226 FPS	223 FPS
ultra	191 FPS	188 FPS
1440p
low	275 FPS	273 FPS
medium	227 FPS	224 FPS
high	176 FPS	174 FPS
ultra	156 FPS	153 FPS
4K
low	189 FPS	187 FPS
medium	156 FPS	154 FPS
high	120 FPS	118 FPS
ultra	106 FPS	104 FPS

Open EPYC 9175F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9175F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX
1080p
low	811 FPS	781 FPS
medium	688 FPS	642 FPS
high	539 FPS	476 FPS
ultra	466 FPS	402 FPS
1440p
low	665 FPS	641 FPS
medium	587 FPS	546 FPS
high	474 FPS	420 FPS
ultra	383 FPS	326 FPS
4K
low	372 FPS	360 FPS
medium	333 FPS	310 FPS
high	306 FPS	271 FPS
ultra	267 FPS	228 FPS

Open EPYC 9175F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9175F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX
1080p
low	922 FPS	888 FPS
medium	746 FPS	705 FPS
high	674 FPS	622 FPS
ultra	573 FPS	534 FPS
1440p
low	723 FPS	713 FPS
medium	582 FPS	567 FPS
high	514 FPS	489 FPS
ultra	434 FPS	414 FPS
4K
low	510 FPS	507 FPS
medium	420 FPS	418 FPS
high	373 FPS	375 FPS
ultra	309 FPS	315 FPS

Open EPYC 9175F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9175F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX
1080p
low	1140 FPS	1106 FPS
medium	1015 FPS	991 FPS
high	901 FPS	867 FPS
ultra	813 FPS	781 FPS
1440p
low	890 FPS	860 FPS
medium	782 FPS	759 FPS
high	686 FPS	664 FPS
ultra	596 FPS	576 FPS
4K
low	650 FPS	632 FPS
medium	578 FPS	562 FPS
high	513 FPS	496 FPS
ultra	437 FPS	429 FPS

Open EPYC 9175F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9175F and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX

EPYC 9175F

The EPYC 9175F is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 4.2 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 512 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: 65,894 points. Launch price was $4,256.

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX

The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 23 July 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Shimada Peak (2025) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 4.5 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 64 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: 67,561 points. Launch price was $1,649.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the EPYC 9175F and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX share an identical 16-core/32-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 5 GHz on the EPYC 9175F versus 5.4 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX — a 7.7% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX (base: 4.2 GHz vs 4.5 GHz). The EPYC 9175F uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX uses Shimada Peak (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9175F scores 65,894 against the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX's 67,561 — a 2.5% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX. L3 cache: 512 MB (total) on the EPYC 9175F vs 64 MB (total) on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX.

Feature	EPYC 9175F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX
Cores / Threads	16 / 32	16 / 32
Boost Clock	5 GHz	5.4 GHz+8%
Base Clock	4.2 GHz	4.5 GHz+7%
L3 Cache	512 MB (total)+700%	64 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	1 MB (per core)
Process	4 nm	4 nm
Architecture	Turin (2024)	Shimada Peak (2025)
PassMark	65,894	67,561+3%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	40,000
Geekbench 6 Single	—	3,016
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	23,596

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9175F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX uses sTR5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 6400 on the EPYC 9175F versus DDR5-6400 on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX — the EPYC 9175F supports 199.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9175F supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 2048 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9175F) vs 8 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX). Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9175F) and WRX90 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX).

Feature	EPYC 9175F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX
Socket	SP5	sTR5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	6400+127900%	DDR5-6400
Max RAM Capacity	4096	2048 GB+52428700%
RAM Channels	12+50%	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128	128

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (EPYC 9175F) vs true (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX). Direct competitor: EPYC 9175F rivals Xeon 6972P; Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX rivals Xeon w7-3555.

Feature	EPYC 9175F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	true

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9175F launched at $4256 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX debuted at $429. On MSRP ($4256 vs $429), the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX is $3827 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9175F delivers 15.5 pts/$ vs 157.5 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX — making the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX the 164.2% better value option.