
EPYC 7551P
Popular choices:

Ryzen 7 9700X
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 7551P
2017Why buy it
- ✅+2.6% higher PassMark.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 32 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 24.
- ✅433.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 9700X across 43 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 18.1 vs 103.5 PassMark/$ ($2,100 MSRP vs $359 MSRP).
- ❌176.9% higher power demand at 180W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on TR4 with DDR4, while Ryzen 7 9700X moves to AM5 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Ryzen 7 9700X can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Ryzen 7 9700X
2024Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +23.3% higher average FPS across 43 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $1,741 less on MSRP ($359 MSRP vs $2,100 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 470.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 103.5 vs 18.1 PassMark/$ ($359 MSRP vs $2,100 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 180W, a 115W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on AM5 with DDR5 support instead of TR4 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (37,145 vs 38,111).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (32 MB vs 64 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7551P, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 7551P
2017Ryzen 7 9700X
2024Why buy it
- ✅+2.6% higher PassMark.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 32 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 24.
- ✅433.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +23.3% higher average FPS across 43 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $1,741 less on MSRP ($359 MSRP vs $2,100 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 470.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 103.5 vs 18.1 PassMark/$ ($359 MSRP vs $2,100 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 180W, a 115W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on AM5 with DDR5 support instead of TR4 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 9700X across 43 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 18.1 vs 103.5 PassMark/$ ($2,100 MSRP vs $359 MSRP).
- ❌176.9% higher power demand at 180W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on TR4 with DDR4, while Ryzen 7 9700X moves to AM5 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Ryzen 7 9700X can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (37,145 vs 38,111).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (32 MB vs 64 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7551P, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen 7 9700X better than EPYC 7551P?
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 7551P | Ryzen 7 9700X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 187 FPS | 265 FPS |
| medium | 165 FPS | 245 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 209 FPS |
| ultra | 105 FPS | 179 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 153 FPS | 226 FPS |
| medium | 127 FPS | 188 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 154 FPS |
| ultra | 78 FPS | 135 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 71 FPS | 157 FPS |
| medium | 63 FPS | 131 FPS |
| high | 48 FPS | 101 FPS |
| ultra | 39 FPS | 87 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | EPYC 7551P | Ryzen 7 9700X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 207 FPS | 639 FPS |
| medium | 188 FPS | 526 FPS |
| high | 160 FPS | 436 FPS |
| ultra | 131 FPS | 392 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 178 FPS | 545 FPS |
| medium | 163 FPS | 470 FPS |
| high | 141 FPS | 395 FPS |
| ultra | 111 FPS | 337 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 112 FPS | 319 FPS |
| medium | 103 FPS | 281 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 265 FPS |
| ultra | 75 FPS | 232 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | EPYC 7551P | Ryzen 7 9700X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 620 FPS | 929 FPS |
| medium | 518 FPS | 744 FPS |
| high | 466 FPS | 650 FPS |
| ultra | 399 FPS | 558 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 517 FPS | 736 FPS |
| medium | 432 FPS | 589 FPS |
| high | 378 FPS | 506 FPS |
| ultra | 325 FPS | 431 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 383 FPS | 508 FPS |
| medium | 308 FPS | 420 FPS |
| high | 270 FPS | 378 FPS |
| ultra | 220 FPS | 318 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | EPYC 7551P | Ryzen 7 9700X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 834 FPS | 929 FPS |
| medium | 758 FPS | 929 FPS |
| high | 651 FPS | 850 FPS |
| ultra | 561 FPS | 756 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 667 FPS | 889 FPS |
| medium | 584 FPS | 773 FPS |
| high | 500 FPS | 678 FPS |
| ultra | 420 FPS | 584 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 475 FPS | 582 FPS |
| medium | 427 FPS | 517 FPS |
| high | 375 FPS | 466 FPS |
| ultra | 320 FPS | 405 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 7551P and Ryzen 7 9700X

EPYC 7551P
EPYC 7551P
The EPYC 7551P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 29 June 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Naples (2017−2018) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: TR4. Thermal design power (TDP): 180 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 38,111 points. Launch price was $2,100.


Ryzen 7 9700X
Ryzen 7 9700X
The Ryzen 7 9700X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 8 August 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Granite Ridge (2024−2025) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 5.5 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: AM5. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 37,145 points. Launch price was $359.
Processing Power
The EPYC 7551P packs 32 cores / 64 threads, while the Ryzen 7 9700X offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the EPYC 7551P has 24 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3 GHz on the EPYC 7551P versus 5.5 GHz on the Ryzen 7 9700X — a 58.8% clock advantage for the Ryzen 7 9700X (base: 2 GHz vs 3.8 GHz). The EPYC 7551P uses the Naples (2017−2018) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen 7 9700X uses Granite Ridge (2024−2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7551P scores 38,111 against the Ryzen 7 9700X's 37,145 — a 2.6% lead for the EPYC 7551P. L3 cache: 64 MB (total) on the EPYC 7551P vs 32 MB (total) on the Ryzen 7 9700X.
| Feature | EPYC 7551P | Ryzen 7 9700X |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 32 / 64+300% | 8 / 16 |
| Boost Clock | 3 GHz | 5.5 GHz+83% |
| Base Clock | 2 GHz | 3.8 GHz+90% |
| L3 Cache | 64 MB (total)+100% | 32 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 512K (per core) | 1 MB (per core)+100% |
| Process | 14 nm | 4 nm-71% |
| Architecture | Naples (2017−2018) | Granite Ridge (2024−2025) |
| PassMark | 38,111+3% | 37,145 |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 7551P uses the TR4 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Ryzen 7 9700X uses AM5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 2666 on the EPYC 7551P versus 5600 on the Ryzen 7 9700X — the Ryzen 7 9700X supports 71% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7551P supports up to 2048 of RAM compared to 256 — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 8 (EPYC 7551P) vs 2 (Ryzen 7 9700X). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 7551P) vs 24 (Ryzen 7 9700X) — the EPYC 7551P offers 104 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP3 (EPYC 7551P) and X870E,X670E,B650 (Ryzen 7 9700X).
| Feature | EPYC 7551P | Ryzen 7 9700X |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | TR4 | AM5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 4.0 | PCIe 5.0+25% |
| Max RAM Speed | 2666 | 5600+110% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 2048+700% | 256 |
| RAM Channels | 8+300% | 2 |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128+433% | 24 |
Advanced Features
Only the Ryzen 7 9700X has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: AMD-V, IOMMU (EPYC 7551P) vs VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V (Ryzen 7 9700X). The Ryzen 7 9700X includes integrated graphics (AMD Radeon Graphics (2-core)), while the EPYC 7551P requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: EPYC 7551P rivals Xeon Platinum 8160; Ryzen 7 9700X rivals Core i7-14700K.
| Feature | EPYC 7551P | Ryzen 7 9700X |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | None | AMD Radeon Graphics (2-core) |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | Yes | Yes |
| Virtualization | AMD-V, IOMMU | VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V |
Value Analysis
The EPYC 7551P launched at $2100 MSRP, while the Ryzen 7 9700X debuted at $359. On MSRP ($2100 vs $359), the Ryzen 7 9700X is $1741 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 7551P delivers 18.1 pts/$ vs 103.5 pts/$ for the Ryzen 7 9700X — making the Ryzen 7 9700X the 140.3% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 7551P | Ryzen 7 9700X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $2100 | $359-83% |
| Performance per Dollar | 18.1 | 103.5+472% |
| Release Date | 2017 | 2024 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












