EPYC 9255 vs Xeon 6730P

CPU

GPU

EPYC 9255

24 Cores48 Thrd200 WWMax: 4.8 GHz2024

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Xeon 6730P

32 Cores64 Thrd250 WWMax: 3.8 GHz2025

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

EPYC 9255

24 / 48

75,809

+2.3%

Ryzen 7 8840HX

Ryzen 9 7900X3D

Ryzen 9 7945HX3D

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Ryzen Threadripper 7970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7980X

Xeon 6730P

32 / 64

74,113

0.0%

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 9255

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +12.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $1,231 less on MSRP ($2,495 MSRP vs $3,726 MSRP).
✅Delivers 52.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 30.4 vs 19.9 PassMark/$ ($2,495 MSRP vs $3,726 MSRP).
✅Draws 200W instead of 250W, a 50W reduction.
✅60% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 80) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 288 MB).

Xeon 6730P

2025

Why buy it

✅+125% larger total L3 cache (288 MB vs 128 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9255 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (74,113 vs 75,809).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 19.9 vs 30.4 PassMark/$ ($3,726 MSRP vs $2,495 MSRP).
❌25% higher power demand at 250W vs 200W.

EPYC 9255

2024

Xeon 6730P

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +12.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $1,231 less on MSRP ($2,495 MSRP vs $3,726 MSRP).
✅Delivers 52.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 30.4 vs 19.9 PassMark/$ ($2,495 MSRP vs $3,726 MSRP).
✅Draws 200W instead of 250W, a 50W reduction.
✅60% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 80) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅+125% larger total L3 cache (288 MB vs 128 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 288 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9255 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (74,113 vs 75,809).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 19.9 vs 30.4 PassMark/$ ($3,726 MSRP vs $2,495 MSRP).
❌25% higher power demand at 250W vs 200W.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9255 better than Xeon 6730P?

Yes. EPYC 9255 is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 12.1% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data and 2.3% better PassMark, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, EPYC 9255 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 12.1% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9255 is the better fit. You are getting 2.3% better PassMark, backed by 24 cores and 48 threads.

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

EPYC 9255 is the smarter buy today. EPYC 9255 is $1,231 cheaper on MSRP at $2,495 MSRP versus $3,726 MSRP, and it gives you a 12.1% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 52.8% better value on MSRP (30.4 vs 19.9 PassMark/$), 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?

Xeon 6730P is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2024) and 125% larger total L3 cache (288 MB vs 128 MB). 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 9255 Benchmark Check

Xeon 6730P Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9255	Xeon 6730P
1080p
low	303 FPS	187 FPS
medium	280 FPS	165 FPS
high	231 FPS	131 FPS
ultra	195 FPS	106 FPS
1440p
low	268 FPS	155 FPS
medium	223 FPS	131 FPS
high	172 FPS	100 FPS
ultra	152 FPS	82 FPS
4K
low	186 FPS	70 FPS
medium	154 FPS	63 FPS
high	117 FPS	49 FPS
ultra	105 FPS	40 FPS

Open EPYC 9255 Open Xeon 6730P

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9255	Xeon 6730P
1080p
low	717 FPS	520 FPS
medium	614 FPS	460 FPS
high	485 FPS	376 FPS
ultra	421 FPS	309 FPS
1440p
low	573 FPS	425 FPS
medium	507 FPS	383 FPS
high	419 FPS	321 FPS
ultra	341 FPS	256 FPS
4K
low	335 FPS	262 FPS
medium	298 FPS	239 FPS
high	270 FPS	212 FPS
ultra	239 FPS	176 FPS

Open EPYC 9255 Open Xeon 6730P

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9255	Xeon 6730P
1080p
low	850 FPS	849 FPS
medium	691 FPS	768 FPS
high	625 FPS	730 FPS
ultra	530 FPS	641 FPS
1440p
low	677 FPS	737 FPS
medium	548 FPS	662 FPS
high	484 FPS	626 FPS
ultra	408 FPS	558 FPS
4K
low	483 FPS	493 FPS
medium	399 FPS	402 FPS
high	355 FPS	364 FPS
ultra	293 FPS	303 FPS

Open EPYC 9255 Open Xeon 6730P

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9255	Xeon 6730P
1080p
low	1083 FPS	980 FPS
medium	982 FPS	883 FPS
high	862 FPS	763 FPS
ultra	777 FPS	659 FPS
1440p
low	859 FPS	801 FPS
medium	761 FPS	698 FPS
high	668 FPS	601 FPS
ultra	582 FPS	514 FPS
4K
low	627 FPS	575 FPS
medium	562 FPS	516 FPS
high	500 FPS	458 FPS
ultra	434 FPS	395 FPS

Open EPYC 9255 Open Xeon 6730P

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9255 and Xeon 6730P

EPYC 9255

The EPYC 9255 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 3.25 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 200 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 75,809 points. Launch price was $2,495.

Xeon 6730P

The Xeon 6730P is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 February 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Granite Rapids (2024−2025) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 288 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4710. Thermal design power (TDP): 250 Watt. Memory support: DDR5(6400MT/s). Passmark benchmark score: 74,113 points. Launch price was $3,726.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9255 packs 24 cores / 48 threads, while the Xeon 6730P offers 32 cores / 64 threads — the Xeon 6730P has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the EPYC 9255 versus 3.8 GHz on the Xeon 6730P — a 23.3% clock advantage for the EPYC 9255 (base: 3.25 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The EPYC 9255 uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Xeon 6730P uses Granite Rapids (2024−2025) (Intel 3 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9255 scores 75,809 against the Xeon 6730P's 74,113 — a 2.3% lead for the EPYC 9255. L3 cache: 128 MB (total) on the EPYC 9255 vs 288 MB (total) on the Xeon 6730P.

Feature	EPYC 9255	Xeon 6730P
Cores / Threads	24 / 48	32 / 64+33%
Boost Clock	4.8 GHz+26%	3.8 GHz
Base Clock	3.25 GHz+30%	2.5 GHz
L3 Cache	128 MB (total)	288 MB (total)+125%
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	2 MB (per core)+100%
Process	4 nm	Intel 3 nm-25%
Architecture	Turin (2024)	Granite Rapids (2024−2025)
PassMark	75,809+2%	74,113

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9255 uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon 6730P uses LGA4710 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 4800 on the EPYC 9255 versus 6400 on the Xeon 6730P — the Xeon 6730P supports 28.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9255 supports up to 6144 of RAM compared to 4096 — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9255) vs 8 (Xeon 6730P). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9255) vs 80 (Xeon 6730P) — the EPYC 9255 offers 48 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9255) and C741 (Xeon 6730P).

Feature	EPYC 9255	Xeon 6730P
Socket	SP5	LGA4710
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	4800	6400+33%
Max RAM Capacity	6144+50%	4096
RAM Channels	12+50%	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+60%	80

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9255) vs VT-x, VT-d, TDX (Xeon 6730P). Direct competitor: EPYC 9255 rivals Xeon Platinum 8480+; Xeon 6730P rivals EPYC 9354.

Feature	EPYC 9255	Xeon 6730P
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d, SEV-SNP	VT-x, VT-d, TDX

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9255 launched at $2495 MSRP, while the Xeon 6730P debuted at $3726. On MSRP ($2495 vs $3726), the EPYC 9255 is $1231 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9255 delivers 30.4 pts/$ vs 19.9 pts/$ for the Xeon 6730P — making the EPYC 9255 the 41.7% better value option.