
EPYC 7543P
Popular choices:

EPYC 9254
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 7543P
2021Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +4.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).
- ✅Costs $1,031 less on MSRP ($2,730 MSRP vs $3,761 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 42.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 24.4 vs 17.1 PassMark/$ ($2,730 MSRP vs $3,761 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while EPYC 9254 moves to SP5 and DDR5.
- ❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.
EPYC 9254
2022Why buy it
- ✅Draws 200W instead of 225W, a 25W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
- ✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 7543P across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (64,344 vs 66,590).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 256 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 17.1 vs 24.4 PassMark/$ ($3,761 MSRP vs $2,730 MSRP).
EPYC 7543P
2021EPYC 9254
2022Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +4.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).
- ✅Costs $1,031 less on MSRP ($2,730 MSRP vs $3,761 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 42.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 24.4 vs 17.1 PassMark/$ ($2,730 MSRP vs $3,761 MSRP).
Why buy it
- ✅Draws 200W instead of 225W, a 25W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
- ✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while EPYC 9254 moves to SP5 and DDR5.
- ❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 7543P across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (64,344 vs 66,590).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 256 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 17.1 vs 24.4 PassMark/$ ($3,761 MSRP vs $2,730 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 7543P better than EPYC 9254?
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 7543P | EPYC 9254 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 198 FPS | 171 FPS |
| medium | 161 FPS | 142 FPS |
| high | 129 FPS | 123 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 96 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 161 FPS | 149 FPS |
| medium | 126 FPS | 120 FPS |
| high | 98 FPS | 97 FPS |
| ultra | 78 FPS | 77 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 73 FPS | 70 FPS |
| medium | 61 FPS | 60 FPS |
| high | 47 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 39 FPS | 39 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | EPYC 7543P | EPYC 9254 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 507 FPS | 603 FPS |
| medium | 443 FPS | 529 FPS |
| high | 354 FPS | 429 FPS |
| ultra | 288 FPS | 375 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 417 FPS | 507 FPS |
| medium | 373 FPS | 453 FPS |
| high | 308 FPS | 379 FPS |
| ultra | 243 FPS | 314 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 257 FPS | 315 FPS |
| medium | 234 FPS | 285 FPS |
| high | 205 FPS | 257 FPS |
| ultra | 171 FPS | 230 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | EPYC 7543P | EPYC 9254 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 850 FPS | 716 FPS |
| medium | 705 FPS | 608 FPS |
| high | 657 FPS | 552 FPS |
| ultra | 580 FPS | 486 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 612 FPS | 549 FPS |
| medium | 506 FPS | 465 FPS |
| high | 464 FPS | 415 FPS |
| ultra | 405 FPS | 359 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 437 FPS | 400 FPS |
| medium | 339 FPS | 321 FPS |
| high | 303 FPS | 283 FPS |
| ultra | 245 FPS | 227 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | EPYC 7543P | EPYC 9254 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 992 FPS | 868 FPS |
| medium | 900 FPS | 793 FPS |
| high | 775 FPS | 684 FPS |
| ultra | 671 FPS | 605 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 763 FPS | 695 FPS |
| medium | 665 FPS | 610 FPS |
| high | 569 FPS | 523 FPS |
| ultra | 490 FPS | 453 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 547 FPS | 502 FPS |
| medium | 488 FPS | 451 FPS |
| high | 428 FPS | 397 FPS |
| ultra | 370 FPS | 340 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 7543P and EPYC 9254

EPYC 7543P
EPYC 7543P
The EPYC 7543P 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 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm+ process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 225 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 66,590 points. Launch price was $2,730.

EPYC 9254
EPYC 9254
The EPYC 9254 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 November 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 4.15 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm, 6 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 200 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 64,344 points. Launch price was $2,299.
Processing Power
The EPYC 7543P packs 32 cores / 64 threads, while the EPYC 9254 offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the EPYC 7543P has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the EPYC 7543P versus 4.15 GHz on the EPYC 9254 — a 11.5% clock advantage for the EPYC 9254 (base: 2.8 GHz vs 2.9 GHz). The EPYC 7543P uses the Milan (2021−2023) architecture (7 nm+), while the EPYC 9254 uses Genoa (2022−2023) (5 nm, 6 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7543P scores 66,590 against the EPYC 9254's 64,344 — a 3.4% lead for the EPYC 7543P. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 7543P vs 128 MB (total) on the EPYC 9254.
| Feature | EPYC 7543P | EPYC 9254 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 32 / 64+33% | 24 / 48 |
| Boost Clock | 3.7 GHz | 4.15 GHz+12% |
| Base Clock | 2.8 GHz | 2.9 GHz+4% |
| L3 Cache | 256 MB (total)+100% | 128 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB (per core) | 1 MB (per core)+100% |
| Process | 7 nm+ | 5 nm, 6 nm-29% |
| Architecture | Milan (2021−2023) | Genoa (2022−2023) |
| PassMark | 66,590+3% | 64,344 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 2,233 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 18,023 |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 7543P uses the SP3 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the EPYC 9254 uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 3200 on the EPYC 7543P versus DDR5-4800 on the EPYC 9254 — the EPYC 7543P supports 199.4% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9254 supports up to 6144 GB of RAM compared to 4096 — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 8 (EPYC 7543P) vs 12 (EPYC 9254). Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP3 (EPYC 7543P) and SP5 (EPYC 9254).
| Feature | EPYC 7543P | EPYC 9254 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP3 | SP5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 4.0 | PCIe 5.0+25% |
| Max RAM Speed | 3200+63900% | DDR5-4800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4096 | 6144 GB+157286300% |
| RAM Channels | 8 | 12+50% |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128 | 128 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 9254 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (EPYC 7543P) vs AMD-V (EPYC 9254). Primary use case: EPYC 9254 targets Enterprise Server. Direct competitor: EPYC 7543P rivals Xeon Platinum 8380; EPYC 9254 rivals Xeon Platinum 8468.
| Feature | EPYC 7543P | EPYC 9254 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | None | None |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | AMD-V |
| Target Use | — | Enterprise Server |
Value Analysis
The EPYC 7543P launched at $2730 MSRP, while the EPYC 9254 debuted at $3761. On MSRP ($2730 vs $3761), the EPYC 7543P is $1031 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 7543P delivers 24.4 pts/$ vs 17.1 pts/$ for the EPYC 9254 — making the EPYC 7543P the 35.1% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 7543P | EPYC 9254 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $2730-27% | $3761 |
| Performance per Dollar | 24.4+43% | 17.1 |
| Release Date | 2021 | 2022 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













