EPYC 73F3 vs Xeon Platinum 8368Q

EPYC 73F3 vs Xeon Platinum 8368Q Performance Spectrum

EPYC 73F3

16 / 32

46,103

0.0%

Ryzen 7 5800

Ryzen 9 PRO 8945HS

Ryzen 7 7700X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen 9 9955HX3D

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

Xeon Platinum 8368Q

38 / 76

46,681

+1.3%

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.

EPYC 73F3 vs Xeon Platinum 8368Q FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

EPYC 73F3 vs Xeon Platinum 8368Q: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

EPYC 73F3

2021

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $4,198 less on MSRP ($3,521 MSRP vs $7,719 MSRP).
✅Delivers 116.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 13.1 vs 6.0 PassMark/$ ($3,521 MSRP vs $7,719 MSRP).
✅Draws 240W instead of 270W, a 30W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (46,103 vs 46,681).

Xeon Platinum 8368Q

2021

Why buy it

✅+1.3% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 73F3 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 6.0 vs 13.1 PassMark/$ ($7,719 MSRP vs $3,521 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 73F3 better than Xeon Platinum 8368Q?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, EPYC 73F3 is ahead with a 5.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Xeon Platinum 8368Q pulls ahead with 1.3% better PassMark. EPYC 73F3 also has the bigger cache pool with 349.1% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 57 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon Platinum 8368Q is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.3% better PassMark, backed by 38 cores and 76 threads.

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

EPYC 73F3 is the better buy right now. EPYC 73F3 comes in $4,198 cheaper on MSRP at $3,521 MSRP versus $7,719 MSRP, and it still gives you a 5.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Xeon Platinum 8368Q is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 1.3% better PassMark. It is also 116.5% better value on MSRP (13.1 vs 6.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Xeon Platinum 8368Q makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more multi-core headroom with 38 cores / 76 threads instead of 16/32. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

EPYC 73F3 vs Xeon Platinum 8368Q Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

EPYC 73F3

The EPYC 73F3 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 15 March 2021 (4 years ago). It is based on the Milan (2021−2023) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm+ process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 240 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 46,103 points. Launch price was $3,521.

Xeon Platinum 8368Q

The Xeon Platinum 8368Q is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Ice Lake-SP (2021) architecture. It features 38 cores and 76 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 57 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4189. Thermal design power (TDP): 270 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 46,681 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 73F3 packs 16 cores / 32 threads, while the Xeon Platinum 8368Q offers 38 cores / 76 threads — the Xeon Platinum 8368Q has 22 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the EPYC 73F3 versus 3.7 GHz on the Xeon Platinum 8368Q — a 7.8% clock advantage for the EPYC 73F3 (base: 3.5 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The EPYC 73F3 uses the Milan (2021−2023) architecture (7 nm+), while the Xeon Platinum 8368Q uses Ice Lake-SP (2021) (10 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 73F3 scores 46,103 against the Xeon Platinum 8368Q's 46,681 — a 1.2% lead for the Xeon Platinum 8368Q. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 73F3 vs 57 MB (total) on the Xeon Platinum 8368Q.

Feature	EPYC 73F3	Xeon Platinum 8368Q
Cores / Threads	16 / 32	38 / 76+138%
Boost Clock	4 GHz+8%	3.7 GHz
Base Clock	3.5 GHz+35%	2.6 GHz
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)+349%	57 MB (total)
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	1 MB (per core)+100%
Process	7 nm+-30%	10 nm
Architecture	Milan (2021−2023)	Ice Lake-SP (2021)
PassMark	46,103	46,681+1%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 73F3 uses the SP3 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon Platinum 8368Q uses LGA4189 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to 3200 memory speed. Both support up to 4096 of RAM. Both feature 8-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP3,C621A (EPYC 73F3) and SP3,C621A (Xeon Platinum 8368Q).

Feature	EPYC 73F3	Xeon Platinum 8368Q
Socket	SP3	LGA4189
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	3200	3200
Max RAM Capacity	4096	4096
RAM Channels	8	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128	128

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. Direct competitor: EPYC 73F3 rivals Xeon Platinum 8362; Xeon Platinum 8368Q rivals Xeon Platinum 8362.

Feature	EPYC 73F3	Xeon Platinum 8368Q
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the EPYC 73F3 was priced at $3521, while the Xeon Platinum 8368Q came in at $7719. On launch pricing ($3521 vs $7719), EPYC 73F3 was $4198 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 73F3 delivers 13.1 pts/$ vs 6.0 pts/$ for the Xeon Platinum 8368Q — making the EPYC 73F3 the 73.6% better value option.

Feature	EPYC 73F3	Xeon Platinum 8368Q
MSRP	$3521-54%	$7719
Performance per Dollar	13.1+118%	6.0
Release Date	2021	2021

Search EPYC 73F3 on Amazon

Search Xeon Platinum 8368Q on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.