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 7371

2018

Why buy it

✅+300% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 16 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 270 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (15,000 vs 16,500).
❌344.4% higher power demand at 200W vs 45W.
❌Older platform position on TR4 with DDR4, while Ryzen 9 270 moves to FP8 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Ryzen 9 270 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Ryzen 9 270

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +31.4% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 45W instead of 200W, a 155W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FP8 with DDR5 support instead of TR4 and DDR4.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon 780M, while EPYC 7371 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7371, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

EPYC 7371

2018

Ryzen 9 270

2025

Why buy it

✅+300% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 16 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +31.4% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 45W instead of 200W, a 155W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FP8 with DDR5 support instead of TR4 and DDR4.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon 780M, while EPYC 7371 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 270 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (15,000 vs 16,500).
❌344.4% higher power demand at 200W vs 45W.
❌Older platform position on TR4 with DDR4, while Ryzen 9 270 moves to FP8 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Ryzen 9 270 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7371, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 9 270 better than EPYC 7371?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 7371 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Ryzen 9 270 is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Ryzen 9 270 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 31.4% 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, Ryzen 9 270 is the better fit. You are getting 10% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads.

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

Ryzen 9 270 still looks like the safer overall buy. Ryzen 9 270 is at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you a 31.4% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Ryzen 9 270 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2018), a healthier platform with FP8 and DDR5 instead of TR4, more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 16/32, and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. 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 7371 Benchmark Check

Ryzen 9 270 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 7371	Ryzen 9 270
1080p
low	193 FPS	265 FPS
medium	168 FPS	240 FPS
high	136 FPS	202 FPS
ultra	108 FPS	174 FPS
1440p
low	159 FPS	234 FPS
medium	132 FPS	192 FPS
high	102 FPS	156 FPS
ultra	82 FPS	138 FPS
4K
low	72 FPS	162 FPS
medium	64 FPS	135 FPS
high	50 FPS	104 FPS
ultra	40 FPS	91 FPS

Open EPYC 7371 Open Ryzen 9 270

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 7371	Ryzen 9 270
1080p
low	426 FPS	488 FPS
medium	383 FPS	401 FPS
high	321 FPS	343 FPS
ultra	269 FPS	305 FPS
1440p
low	367 FPS	427 FPS
medium	334 FPS	369 FPS
high	283 FPS	316 FPS
ultra	230 FPS	269 FPS
4K
low	229 FPS	281 FPS
medium	211 FPS	255 FPS
high	190 FPS	239 FPS
ultra	159 FPS	205 FPS

Open EPYC 7371 Open Ryzen 9 270

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 7371	Ryzen 9 270
1080p
low	634 FPS	740 FPS
medium	531 FPS	740 FPS
high	490 FPS	729 FPS
ultra	416 FPS	623 FPS
1440p
low	522 FPS	740 FPS
medium	436 FPS	644 FPS
high	393 FPS	544 FPS
ultra	336 FPS	467 FPS
4K
low	386 FPS	540 FPS
medium	310 FPS	474 FPS
high	280 FPS	421 FPS
ultra	227 FPS	357 FPS

Open EPYC 7371 Open Ryzen 9 270

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 7371	Ryzen 9 270
1080p
low	754 FPS	740 FPS
medium	754 FPS	740 FPS
high	688 FPS	740 FPS
ultra	609 FPS	740 FPS
1440p
low	701 FPS	740 FPS
medium	617 FPS	740 FPS
high	530 FPS	657 FPS
ultra	455 FPS	572 FPS
4K
low	502 FPS	574 FPS
medium	452 FPS	511 FPS
high	399 FPS	455 FPS
ultra	345 FPS	393 FPS

Open EPYC 7371 Open Ryzen 9 270

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 7371 and Ryzen 9 270

EPYC 7371

The EPYC 7371 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 16 November 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Naples (2017−2018) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: TR4. Thermal design power (TDP): 170 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 30,156 points. Launch price was $1,550.

Ryzen 9 270

The Ryzen 9 270 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 6 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Hawk Point (2024−2025) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 4 GHz, with boost up to 5.2 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FP8. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 29,602 points. Launch price was $299.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 7371 packs 16 cores / 32 threads, while the Ryzen 9 270 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the EPYC 7371 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the EPYC 7371 versus 5.2 GHz on the Ryzen 9 270 — a 31.1% clock advantage for the Ryzen 9 270 (base: 3.1 GHz vs 4 GHz). The EPYC 7371 uses the Naples (2017−2018) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen 9 270 uses Hawk Point (2024−2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7371 scores 30,156 against the Ryzen 9 270's 29,602 — a 1.9% lead for the EPYC 7371. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 15,000 vs 16,500 (9.5% advantage for the Ryzen 9 270). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,216 vs 2,636, a 73.7% lead for the Ryzen 9 270 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 6,941 vs 13,000 (60.8% advantage for the Ryzen 9 270). L3 cache: 64 MB (total) on the EPYC 7371 vs 16 MB (total) on the Ryzen 9 270.

Feature	EPYC 7371	Ryzen 9 270
Cores / Threads	16 / 32+100%	8 / 16
Boost Clock	3.8 GHz	5.2 GHz+37%
Base Clock	3.1 GHz	4 GHz+29%
L3 Cache	64 MB (total)+300%	16 MB (total)
L2 Cache	512K (per core)	1 MB (per core)+100%
Process	14 nm	4 nm-71%
Architecture	Naples (2017−2018)	Hawk Point (2024−2025)
PassMark	30,156+2%	29,602
Cinebench R23 Multi	15,000	16,500+10%
Geekbench 6 Single	1,216	2,636+117%
Geekbench 6 Multi	6,941	13,000+87%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 7371 uses the TR4 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Ryzen 9 270 uses FP8 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the EPYC 7371 versus DDR5-5600 on the Ryzen 9 270 — the Ryzen 9 270 supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7371 supports up to 2048 GB of RAM compared to 256 GB — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 8 (EPYC 7371) vs 2 (Ryzen 9 270). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 7371) vs 20 (Ryzen 9 270) — the EPYC 7371 offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP3 platform (EPYC 7371) and FP8 platform (Ryzen 9 270).

Feature	EPYC 7371	Ryzen 9 270
Socket	TR4	FP8
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	DDR5-5600+25%
Max RAM Capacity	2048 GB+700%	256 GB
RAM Channels	8+300%	2
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+540%	20

🔧

Advanced Features

Both processors feature an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Only the Ryzen 9 270 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support AMD-V, SVM virtualization. The Ryzen 9 270 includes integrated graphics (Radeon 780M), while the EPYC 7371 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: EPYC 7371 targets High-frequency Server Workloads, Ryzen 9 270 targets Professional Content Creation Laptop. Direct competitor: EPYC 7371 rivals Xeon Gold 6134; Ryzen 9 270 rivals Core i9-13900H.

Feature	EPYC 7371	Ryzen 9 270
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	Radeon 780M
Unlocked	Yes	Yes
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	AMD-V, SVM	AMD-V, SVM
Target Use	High-frequency Server Workloads	Professional Content Creation Laptop