EPYC 7642 vs Xeon W-3375

CPU

GPU

EPYC 7642

48 Cores96 Thrd225 WWMax: 3.4 GHz2019

EPYC family

·······

Buy on Amazon

Xeon W-3375

38 Cores76 Thrd270 WWMax: 4 GHz2021

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

EPYC 7642 vs Xeon W-3375 Performance Spectrum

EPYC 7642

48 / 96

59,333

+0.4%

Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 370

Ryzen 9 5900X

Ryzen 9 5950X

Ryzen 9 9850HX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Ryzen Threadripper 7970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Xeon W-3375

38 / 76

59,091

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.

EPYC 7642 vs Xeon W-3375 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 7642 vs Xeon W-3375: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

EPYC 7642

2019

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.
✅+349.1% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 57 MB).
✅Costs $176 less on MSRP ($4,775 MSRP vs $4,951 MSRP).
✅Draws 225W instead of 270W, a 45W reduction.
✅100% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 64) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3375 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Xeon W-3375

2021

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.4% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (59,091 vs 59,333).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (57 MB vs 256 MB).
❌
3.7% HIGHER MSRP
$4,951 MSRPvs$4,775 MSRP
❌20% higher power demand at 270W vs 225W.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 7642 better than Xeon W-3375?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Xeon W-3375 is ahead with a 3.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 7642 pulls ahead with 0.4% better PassMark. EPYC 7642 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, EPYC 7642 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 48 cores and 96 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 349.1% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 57 MB).

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

EPYC 7642 is the better buy right now. EPYC 7642 comes in $176 cheaper on MSRP at $4,775 MSRP versus $4,951 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.4% better PassMark. The compromise is that Xeon W-3375 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 3.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 4.1% better value on MSRP (12.4 vs 11.9 PassMark/$), 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 W-3375 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2021 vs 2019) and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. That makes it the safer long-term bet.

EPYC 7642 vs Xeon W-3375 Technical Specifications

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

EPYC 7642

The EPYC 7642 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 August 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture. It features 48 cores and 96 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 14 nm process technology. Socket: TR4. Thermal design power (TDP): 225 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 59,333 points. Launch price was $4,775.

Xeon W-3375

The Xeon W-3375 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2021-07-29. It is based on the Ice Lake-W (2021) architecture. It features 38 cores and 76 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 4 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: 59,091 points. Launch price was $4,499.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 7642 packs 48 cores / 96 threads, while the Xeon W-3375 offers 38 cores / 76 threads — the EPYC 7642 has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.4 GHz on the EPYC 7642 versus 4 GHz on the Xeon W-3375 — a 16.2% clock advantage for the Xeon W-3375 (base: 2.4 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The EPYC 7642 uses the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture (7 nm, 14 nm), while the Xeon W-3375 uses Ice Lake-W (2021) (10 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7642 scores 59,333 against the Xeon W-3375's 59,091 — a 0.4% lead for the EPYC 7642. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 7642 vs 57 MB (total) on the Xeon W-3375.

Feature	EPYC 7642	Xeon W-3375
Cores / Threads	48 / 96+26%	38 / 76
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz	4 GHz+18%
Base Clock	2.4 GHz	2.5 GHz+4%
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)+349%	57 MB (total)
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+51100%	1 MB (per core)
Process	7 nm, 14 nm-30%	10 nm
Architecture	Zen 2 (2017−2020)	Ice Lake-W (2021)
PassMark	59,333	59,091
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,818
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	17,713

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 7642 uses the TR4 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon W-3375 uses LGA4189 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to 3200 memory speed. Both support up to 4096 GB of RAM. Both feature 8-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 7642) vs 64 (Xeon W-3375) — the EPYC 7642 offers 64 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP3 (EPYC 7642) and Intel C621A (Xeon W-3375).

Feature	EPYC 7642	Xeon W-3375
Socket	TR4	LGA4189
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	3200	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	4096 GB	4096 GB
RAM Channels	8	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+100%	64

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the Xeon W-3375 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (EPYC 7642) vs true (Xeon W-3375). Direct competitor: EPYC 7642 rivals Xeon Platinum 8380; Xeon W-3375 rivals EPYC 7543.

Feature	EPYC 7642	Xeon W-3375
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	true

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the EPYC 7642 was priced at $4775, while the Xeon W-3375 came in at $4951. On launch pricing ($4775 vs $4951), EPYC 7642 was $176 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 7642 delivers 12.4 pts/$ vs 11.9 pts/$ for the Xeon W-3375 — making the EPYC 7642 the 4% better value option.

Feature	EPYC 7642	Xeon W-3375
MSRP	$4775-4%	$4951
Performance per Dollar	12.4+4%	11.9
Release Date	2019	2021

Search EPYC 7642 on Amazon

Search Xeon W-3375 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.