EPYC 7F72
EPYC 9174F
EPYC 7F72 vs EPYC 9174F Performance Spectrum
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 7F72 vs EPYC 9174F 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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
EPYC 7F72 vs EPYC 9174F: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
EPYC 7F72
2020Why buy it
- ✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
- ✅Draws 240W instead of 320W, a 80W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9174F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (192 MB vs 256 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 24.8 vs 269.3 PassMark/$ ($2,131 MSRP vs $194 MSRP).
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while EPYC 9174F moves to SP5 and DDR5.
EPYC 9174F
2022Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +27.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 192 MB).
- ✅Costs $1,937 less on MSRP ($194 MSRP vs $2,131 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 986.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 269.3 vs 24.8 PassMark/$ ($194 MSRP vs $2,131 MSRP).
- ✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (52,249 vs 52,840).
- ❌33.3% higher power demand at 320W vs 240W.
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 9174F better than EPYC 7F72?
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?
EPYC 7F72 vs EPYC 9174F Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
EPYC 7F72
The EPYC 7F72 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 14 April 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 192 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 240 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 52,840 points. Launch price was $2,450.
EPYC 9174F
The EPYC 9174F 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 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 4.1 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 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): 320 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 52,249 points. Launch price was $3,850.
Processing Power
The EPYC 7F72 packs 24 cores / 48 threads, while the EPYC 9174F offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the EPYC 7F72 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the EPYC 7F72 versus 4.4 GHz on the EPYC 9174F — a 17.3% clock advantage for the EPYC 9174F (base: 3.2 GHz vs 4.1 GHz). The EPYC 7F72 uses the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture (7 nm, 14 nm), while the EPYC 9174F uses Genoa (2022−2023) (5 nm, 6 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7F72 scores 52,840 against the EPYC 9174F's 52,249 — a 1.1% lead for the EPYC 7F72. L3 cache: 192 MB (total) on the EPYC 7F72 vs 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9174F.
| Feature | EPYC 7F72 | EPYC 9174F |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 24 / 48+50% | 16 / 32 |
| Boost Clock | 3.7 GHz | 4.4 GHz+19% |
| Base Clock | 3.2 GHz | 4.1 GHz+28% |
| L3 Cache | 192 MB (total) | 256 MB (total)+33% |
| L2 Cache | 512K (per core)+51100% | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | 7 nm, 14 nm | 5 nm, 6 nm-29% |
| Architecture | Zen 2 (2017−2020) | Genoa (2022−2023) |
| PassMark | 52,840+1% | 52,249 |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 7F72 uses the SP3 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the EPYC 9174F uses SP5 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 3200 on the EPYC 7F72 versus 4800 on the EPYC 9174F — the EPYC 9174F supports 50% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9174F supports up to 6144 of RAM compared to 4096 — 50% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 8 (EPYC 7F72) vs 12 (EPYC 9174F). Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP3 (EPYC 7F72) and SP5 (EPYC 9174F).
| Feature | EPYC 7F72 | EPYC 9174F |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP3 | SP5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 4.0 | PCIe 5.0+25% |
| Max RAM Speed | 3200 | 4800+50% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4096 | 6144+50% |
| RAM Channels | 8 | 12+50% |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128 | 128 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 9174F supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. Direct competitor: EPYC 7F72 rivals Xeon Platinum 8260; EPYC 9174F rivals Xeon Platinum 8468.
| Feature | EPYC 7F72 | EPYC 9174F |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | None | None |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d |
Value Analysis
At launch, the EPYC 7F72 was priced at $2131, while the EPYC 9174F came in at $194. On launch pricing ($2131 vs $194), EPYC 9174F was $1937 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 7F72 delivers 24.8 pts/$ vs 269.3 pts/$ for the EPYC 9174F — making the EPYC 9174F the 166.3% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 7F72 | EPYC 9174F |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $2131 | $194-91% |
| Performance per Dollar | 24.8 | 269.3+986% |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2022 |
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.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on EPYC 7F72 and EPYC 9174F
