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 7C13

2021

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +11.2% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $1,420 less on MSRP ($2,000 MSRP vs $3,420 MSRP).
✅Delivers 76.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 38.2 vs 21.6 PassMark/$ ($2,000 MSRP vs $3,420 MSRP).
✅Draws 225W instead of 280W, a 55W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while EPYC 9354 moves to SP5 and DDR5.
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

EPYC 9354

2022

Why buy it

✅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 7C13 across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (73,892 vs 76,363).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 21.6 vs 38.2 PassMark/$ ($3,420 MSRP vs $2,000 MSRP).
❌24.4% higher power demand at 280W vs 225W.

EPYC 7C13

2021

EPYC 9354

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +11.2% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $1,420 less on MSRP ($2,000 MSRP vs $3,420 MSRP).
✅Delivers 76.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 38.2 vs 21.6 PassMark/$ ($2,000 MSRP vs $3,420 MSRP).
✅Draws 225W instead of 280W, a 55W reduction.

Why buy it

✅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 9354 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 7C13 across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (73,892 vs 76,363).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 21.6 vs 38.2 PassMark/$ ($3,420 MSRP vs $2,000 MSRP).
❌24.4% higher power demand at 280W vs 225W.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 7C13 better than EPYC 9354?

Yes. EPYC 7C13 is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 11.2% average FPS lead across 3 shared CPU game tests in our data and 3.3% better PassMark, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, EPYC 7C13 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 11.2% more average FPS across 3 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 7C13 is the better fit. You are getting 3.3% better PassMark, backed by 64 cores and 128 threads.

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

EPYC 7C13 is the smarter buy today. EPYC 7C13 is $1,420 cheaper on MSRP at $2,000 MSRP versus $3,420 MSRP, and it gives you a 11.2% average FPS lead across 3 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 76.7% better value on MSRP (38.2 vs 21.6 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

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

EPYC 9354 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2022 vs 2021), a healthier platform with SP5 and DDR5 instead of SP3, 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 7C13 Benchmark Check

EPYC 9354 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 7C13	EPYC 9354
1080p
low	195 FPS	176 FPS
medium	159 FPS	145 FPS
high	129 FPS	125 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	96 FPS
1440p
low	160 FPS	153 FPS
medium	125 FPS	123 FPS
high	97 FPS	99 FPS
ultra	77 FPS	77 FPS
4K
low	72 FPS	71 FPS
medium	60 FPS	60 FPS
high	47 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	39 FPS	39 FPS

Open EPYC 7C13 Open EPYC 9354

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 7C13	EPYC 9354
1080p
low	267 FPS	534 FPS
medium	235 FPS	466 FPS
high	193 FPS	374 FPS
ultra	158 FPS	304 FPS
1440p
low	219 FPS	439 FPS
medium	198 FPS	392 FPS
high	167 FPS	324 FPS
ultra	133 FPS	255 FPS
4K
low	135 FPS	270 FPS
medium	124 FPS	246 FPS
high	112 FPS	216 FPS
ultra	94 FPS	179 FPS

Open EPYC 7C13 Open EPYC 9354

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 7C13	EPYC 9354
1080p
low	837 FPS	673 FPS
medium	698 FPS	562 FPS
high	650 FPS	523 FPS
ultra	574 FPS	455 FPS
1440p
low	602 FPS	511 FPS
medium	500 FPS	426 FPS
high	459 FPS	390 FPS
ultra	401 FPS	337 FPS
4K
low	430 FPS	377 FPS
medium	336 FPS	295 FPS
high	300 FPS	263 FPS
ultra	243 FPS	211 FPS

Open EPYC 7C13 Open EPYC 9354

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 7C13	EPYC 9354
1080p
low	977 FPS	937 FPS
medium	886 FPS	856 FPS
high	761 FPS	735 FPS
ultra	659 FPS	648 FPS
1440p
low	753 FPS	751 FPS
medium	657 FPS	658 FPS
high	560 FPS	561 FPS
ultra	481 FPS	480 FPS
4K
low	541 FPS	539 FPS
medium	481 FPS	484 FPS
high	422 FPS	423 FPS
ultra	364 FPS	366 FPS

Open EPYC 7C13 Open EPYC 9354

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 7C13 and EPYC 9354

EPYC 7C13

The EPYC 7C13 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2021-03-01. It is based on the Milan (2021−2023) architecture. It features 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 3.68 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. Passmark benchmark score: 76,363 points. Launch price was $5,000.

EPYC 9354

The EPYC 9354 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 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 3.25 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm, 6 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 280 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 73,892 points. Launch price was $3,420.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 7C13 packs 64 cores / 128 threads, while the EPYC 9354 offers 32 cores / 64 threads — the EPYC 7C13 has 32 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.68 GHz on the EPYC 7C13 versus 3.8 GHz on the EPYC 9354 — a 3.2% clock advantage for the EPYC 9354 (base: 2 GHz vs 3.25 GHz). The EPYC 7C13 uses the Milan (2021−2023) architecture (7 nm), while the EPYC 9354 uses Genoa (2022−2023) (5 nm, 6 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7C13 scores 76,363 against the EPYC 9354's 73,892 — a 3.3% lead for the EPYC 7C13. Both processors carry 256 MB (total) of L3 cache.

Feature	EPYC 7C13	EPYC 9354
Cores / Threads	64 / 128+100%	32 / 64
Boost Clock	3.68 GHz	3.8 GHz+3%
Base Clock	2 GHz	3.25 GHz+63%
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)	256 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	76,363+3%	73,892
Geekbench 6 Single	1,538	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	37,000	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 7C13 uses the SP3 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the EPYC 9354 uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-3200 on the EPYC 7C13 versus 4800 on the EPYC 9354 — the EPYC 9354 supports 199.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9354 supports up to 6144 of RAM compared to 4096 GB — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 8 (EPYC 7C13) vs 12 (EPYC 9354). Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP3 (EPYC 7C13) and SP5 (EPYC 9354).

Feature	EPYC 7C13	EPYC 9354
Socket	SP3	SP5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 5.0+25%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-3200	4800+119900%
Max RAM Capacity	4096 GB+69904967%	6144
RAM Channels	8	12+50%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128	128

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 9354 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: AMD-V (EPYC 7C13) vs VT-x, VT-d, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9354). Primary use case: EPYC 7C13 targets Enterprise Server. Direct competitor: EPYC 7C13 rivals Xeon Platinum 8380; EPYC 9354 rivals Xeon Platinum 8468.

Feature	EPYC 7C13	EPYC 9354
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	AMD-V	VT-x, VT-d, SEV-SNP
Target Use	Enterprise Server	—

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 7C13 launched at $2000 MSRP, while the EPYC 9354 debuted at $3420. On MSRP ($2000 vs $3420), the EPYC 7C13 is $1420 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 7C13 delivers 38.2 pts/$ vs 21.6 pts/$ for the EPYC 9354 — making the EPYC 7C13 the 55.4% better value option.