
EPYC 9375F
Popular choices:

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX
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 9375F
2024Why buy it
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).
- ✅Draws 320W instead of 350W, a 30W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (2,981 vs 3,349).
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (26,020 vs 30,722).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 18.0 vs 32.3 PassMark/$ ($5,306 MSRP vs $2,899 MSRP).
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX
2025Why buy it
- ✅+12.3% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
- ✅Costs $2,407 less on MSRP ($2,899 MSRP vs $5,306 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 79.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 32.3 vs 18.0 PassMark/$ ($2,899 MSRP vs $5,306 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 256 MB).
EPYC 9375F
2024Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX
2025Why buy it
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).
- ✅Draws 320W instead of 350W, a 30W reduction.
Why buy it
- ✅+12.3% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
- ✅Costs $2,407 less on MSRP ($2,899 MSRP vs $5,306 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 79.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 32.3 vs 18.0 PassMark/$ ($2,899 MSRP vs $5,306 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (2,981 vs 3,349).
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (26,020 vs 30,722).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 18.0 vs 32.3 PassMark/$ ($5,306 MSRP vs $2,899 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 256 MB).
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX better than EPYC 9375F?
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 9375F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX |
|---|---|---|
| 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 |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | EPYC 9375F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX |
|---|---|---|
| 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 |

League of Legends
| Preset | EPYC 9375F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX |
|---|---|---|
| 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 |

Valorant
| Preset | EPYC 9375F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX |
|---|---|---|
| 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 |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9375F and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX

EPYC 9375F
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 9965WX
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX
The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX 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 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 4.2 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: 93,660 points. Launch price was $2,899.
Processing Power
The EPYC 9375F packs 32 cores / 64 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the EPYC 9375F has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the EPYC 9375F versus 5.4 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX — a 11.8% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX (base: 3.85 GHz vs 4.2 GHz). The EPYC 9375F uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX uses Shimada Peak (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9375F scores 95,768 against the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX's 93,660 — a 2.2% lead for the EPYC 9375F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,981 vs 3,349, a 11.6% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 26,020 vs 30,722 (16.6% advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX). L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9375F vs 128 MB (total) on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX.
| Feature | EPYC 9375F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 32 / 64+33% | 24 / 48 |
| Boost Clock | 4.8 GHz | 5.4 GHz+13% |
| 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+2% | 93,660 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 60,336 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,981 | 3,349+12% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 26,020 | 30,722+18% |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 9375F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX uses sTR5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-6000 memory speed. The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX 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 9965WX). Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9375F) and WRX90,TRX50 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX).
| Feature | EPYC 9375F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP5 | sTR5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-6000 | DDR5-6400 |
| 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 9965WX). Primary use case: EPYC 9375F targets Data Center / Frequency Optimized, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX targets High-end Workstation. Direct competitor: EPYC 9375F rivals Xeon 6766E; Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX rivals Xeon w9-3595X.
| Feature | EPYC 9375F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| AVX-512 | — | Yes |
| Virtualization | AMD-V, SEV-SNP | true |
| Target Use | Data Center / Frequency Optimized | High-end Workstation |
Value Analysis
The EPYC 9375F launched at $5306 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX debuted at $2899. On MSRP ($5306 vs $2899), the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX is $2407 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9375F delivers 18.0 pts/$ vs 32.3 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX — making the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX the 56.6% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 9375F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $5306 | $2899-45% |
| Performance per Dollar | 18.0 | 32.3+79% |
| Release Date | 2024 | 2025 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












