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 9475F

2024

Why buy it

✅+45.2% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 16.1 vs 25.9 PassMark/$ ($7,592 MSRP vs $4,099 MSRP).

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $3,493 less on MSRP ($4,099 MSRP vs $7,592 MSRP).
✅Delivers 60.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 25.9 vs 16.1 PassMark/$ ($4,099 MSRP vs $7,592 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (31,000 vs 45,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 256 MB).

EPYC 9475F

2024

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

2025

Why buy it

✅+45.2% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $3,493 less on MSRP ($4,099 MSRP vs $7,592 MSRP).
✅Delivers 60.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 25.9 vs 16.1 PassMark/$ ($4,099 MSRP vs $7,592 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 16.1 vs 25.9 PassMark/$ ($7,592 MSRP vs $4,099 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (31,000 vs 45,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 256 MB).

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX better than EPYC 9475F?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX is ahead with a 6.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9475F pulls ahead with 45.2% better Geekbench multi-core. EPYC 9475F 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 9475F is the better fit. You are getting 45.2% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 48 cores and 96 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 PRO 9975WX is the smarter buy today. Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX is $3,493 cheaper on MSRP at $4,099 MSRP versus $7,592 MSRP, and it gives you a 6.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that EPYC 9475F is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 45.2% better Geekbench multi-core. It is also 60.7% better value on MSRP (25.9 vs 16.1 PassMark/$), 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 9975WX is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2024). 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 9475F Benchmark Check

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9475F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX
1080p
low	315 FPS	314 FPS
medium	289 FPS	289 FPS
high	240 FPS	240 FPS
ultra	203 FPS	203 FPS
1440p
low	278 FPS	278 FPS
medium	230 FPS	231 FPS
high	178 FPS	178 FPS
ultra	157 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 9475F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9475F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX
1080p
low	725 FPS	818 FPS
medium	618 FPS	697 FPS
high	485 FPS	542 FPS
ultra	421 FPS	472 FPS
1440p
low	579 FPS	674 FPS
medium	510 FPS	599 FPS
high	419 FPS	480 FPS
ultra	341 FPS	388 FPS
4K
low	338 FPS	377 FPS
medium	300 FPS	339 FPS
high	270 FPS	310 FPS
ultra	239 FPS	271 FPS

Open EPYC 9475F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9475F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX
1080p
low	906 FPS	891 FPS
medium	738 FPS	723 FPS
high	668 FPS	649 FPS
ultra	566 FPS	552 FPS
1440p
low	702 FPS	714 FPS
medium	570 FPS	580 FPS
high	503 FPS	508 FPS
ultra	424 FPS	427 FPS
4K
low	496 FPS	508 FPS
medium	411 FPS	419 FPS
high	365 FPS	375 FPS
ultra	302 FPS	311 FPS

Open EPYC 9475F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9475F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX
1080p
low	1139 FPS	1116 FPS
medium	1015 FPS	1002 FPS
high	901 FPS	879 FPS
ultra	812 FPS	792 FPS
1440p
low	888 FPS	872 FPS
medium	782 FPS	768 FPS
high	687 FPS	674 FPS
ultra	598 FPS	587 FPS
4K
low	648 FPS	636 FPS
medium	578 FPS	568 FPS
high	513 FPS	504 FPS
ultra	437 FPS	437 FPS

Open EPYC 9475F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9475F and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

EPYC 9475F

The EPYC 9475F is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 48 cores and 96 threads. Base frequency is 3.65 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): 400 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 122,476 points. Launch price was $7,592.

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX 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 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: 106,263 points. Launch price was $4,099.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9475F packs 48 cores / 96 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX offers 32 cores / 64 threads — the EPYC 9475F has 16 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the EPYC 9475F versus 5.4 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX — a 11.8% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX (base: 3.65 GHz vs 4 GHz). The EPYC 9475F uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX uses Shimada Peak (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9475F scores 122,476 against the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX's 106,263 — a 14.2% lead for the EPYC 9475F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,960 vs 3,200, a 48.1% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 45,000 vs 31,000 (36.8% advantage for the EPYC 9475F). L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9475F vs 128 MB (total) on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX.

Feature	EPYC 9475F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX
Cores / Threads	48 / 96+50%	32 / 64
Boost Clock	4.8 GHz	5.4 GHz+13%
Base Clock	3.65 GHz	4 GHz+10%
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	122,476+15%	106,263
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	83,982
Geekbench 6 Single	1,960	3,200+63%
Geekbench 6 Multi	45,000+45%	31,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9475F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX uses sTR5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-6000 memory speed. The EPYC 9475F supports up to 6144 GB of RAM compared to 2048 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9475F) vs 8 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX). Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9475F) and WRX90,TRX50 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX).

Feature	EPYC 9475F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX
Socket	SP5	sTR5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6000	DDR5-6400
Max RAM Capacity	6144 GB+200%	2048 GB
RAM Channels	12+50%	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128	128

🔧

Advanced Features

Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: AMD-V (EPYC 9475F) vs true (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX). Primary use case: EPYC 9475F targets Server, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX targets High-end Workstation. Direct competitor: EPYC 9475F rivals Xeon 6952P; Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX rivals Xeon w7-3465X.

Feature	EPYC 9475F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	AMD-V	true
Target Use	Server	High-end Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9475F launched at $7592 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX debuted at $4099. On MSRP ($7592 vs $4099), the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX is $3493 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9475F delivers 16.1 pts/$ vs 25.9 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX — making the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX the 46.6% better value option.