
EPYC 7F72
Popular choices:

Ryzen 9 9850HX
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 7F72
2020Why buy it
- ✅+2.3% higher PassMark.
- ✅+200% larger total L3 cache (192 MB vs 64 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 28.
- ✅357.1% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 28) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 9850HX across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $2,131 MSRP, while Ryzen 9 9850HX mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌336.4% higher power demand at 240W vs 55W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Ryzen 9 9850HX moves to FL1 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Ryzen 9 9850HX can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Ryzen 9 9850HX
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +32.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 240W, a 185W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FL1 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with AMD Radeon 610M, while EPYC 7F72 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (51,665 vs 52,840).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (64 MB vs 192 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7F72, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 7F72
2020Ryzen 9 9850HX
2025Why buy it
- ✅+2.3% higher PassMark.
- ✅+200% larger total L3 cache (192 MB vs 64 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 28.
- ✅357.1% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 28) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +32.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 240W, a 185W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FL1 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with AMD Radeon 610M, while EPYC 7F72 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 9850HX across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $2,131 MSRP, while Ryzen 9 9850HX mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌336.4% higher power demand at 240W vs 55W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Ryzen 9 9850HX moves to FL1 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Ryzen 9 9850HX can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (51,665 vs 52,840).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (64 MB vs 192 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7F72, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen 9 9850HX 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?
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 7F72 | Ryzen 9 9850HX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 176 FPS | 268 FPS |
| medium | 148 FPS | 244 FPS |
| high | 130 FPS | 208 FPS |
| ultra | 102 FPS | 180 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 151 FPS | 253 FPS |
| medium | 122 FPS | 207 FPS |
| high | 98 FPS | 163 FPS |
| ultra | 78 FPS | 146 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 71 FPS | 175 FPS |
| medium | 61 FPS | 144 FPS |
| high | 48 FPS | 107 FPS |
| ultra | 39 FPS | 96 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | EPYC 7F72 | Ryzen 9 9850HX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 510 FPS | 669 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 576 FPS |
| high | 341 FPS | 433 FPS |
| ultra | 273 FPS | 375 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 418 FPS | 564 FPS |
| medium | 377 FPS | 503 FPS |
| high | 297 FPS | 391 FPS |
| ultra | 230 FPS | 312 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 260 FPS | 318 FPS |
| medium | 239 FPS | 288 FPS |
| high | 200 FPS | 255 FPS |
| ultra | 163 FPS | 219 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | EPYC 7F72 | Ryzen 9 9850HX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 605 FPS | 849 FPS |
| medium | 495 FPS | 678 FPS |
| high | 452 FPS | 600 FPS |
| ultra | 388 FPS | 514 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 520 FPS | 678 FPS |
| medium | 431 FPS | 542 FPS |
| high | 388 FPS | 469 FPS |
| ultra | 334 FPS | 397 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 388 FPS | 484 FPS |
| medium | 302 FPS | 400 FPS |
| high | 265 FPS | 360 FPS |
| ultra | 212 FPS | 302 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | EPYC 7F72 | Ryzen 9 9850HX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 877 FPS | 1072 FPS |
| medium | 808 FPS | 966 FPS |
| high | 695 FPS | 843 FPS |
| ultra | 613 FPS | 760 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 708 FPS | 842 FPS |
| medium | 626 FPS | 747 FPS |
| high | 535 FPS | 652 FPS |
| ultra | 458 FPS | 566 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 508 FPS | 619 FPS |
| medium | 460 FPS | 553 FPS |
| high | 404 FPS | 487 FPS |
| ultra | 349 FPS | 421 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 7F72 and Ryzen 9 9850HX

EPYC 7F72
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.


Ryzen 9 9850HX
Ryzen 9 9850HX
The Ryzen 9 9850HX is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 6 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Fire Range-HX (Zen 5) (2025) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 5.2 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FL1. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 51,665 points. Launch price was $499.
Processing Power
The EPYC 7F72 packs 24 cores / 48 threads, while the Ryzen 9 9850HX offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the EPYC 7F72 has 12 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the EPYC 7F72 versus 5.2 GHz on the Ryzen 9 9850HX — a 33.7% clock advantage for the Ryzen 9 9850HX (base: 3.2 GHz vs 3 GHz). The EPYC 7F72 uses the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture (7 nm, 14 nm), while the Ryzen 9 9850HX uses Fire Range-HX (Zen 5) (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 7F72 scores 52,840 against the Ryzen 9 9850HX's 51,665 — a 2.2% lead for the EPYC 7F72. L3 cache: 192 MB (total) on the EPYC 7F72 vs 64 MB (total) on the Ryzen 9 9850HX.
| Feature | EPYC 7F72 | Ryzen 9 9850HX |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 24 / 48+100% | 12 / 24 |
| Boost Clock | 3.7 GHz | 5.2 GHz+41% |
| Base Clock | 3.2 GHz+7% | 3 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 192 MB (total)+200% | 64 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 512K (per core) | 1 MB (per core)+100% |
| Process | 7 nm, 14 nm | 4 nm-43% |
| Architecture | Zen 2 (2017−2020) | Fire Range-HX (Zen 5) (2025) |
| PassMark | 52,840+2% | 51,665 |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 7F72 uses the SP3 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Ryzen 9 9850HX uses FL1 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 3200 on the EPYC 7F72 versus 5600 on the Ryzen 9 9850HX — the Ryzen 9 9850HX supports 54.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7F72 supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 192 — 182.1% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 8 (EPYC 7F72) vs 2 (Ryzen 9 9850HX). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 7F72) vs 28 (Ryzen 9 9850HX) — the EPYC 7F72 offers 100 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP3 (EPYC 7F72) and FL1 (Ryzen 9 9850HX).
| Feature | EPYC 7F72 | Ryzen 9 9850HX |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP3 | FL1 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 4.0 | PCIe 5.0+25% |
| Max RAM Speed | 3200 | 5600+75% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4096+2033% | 192 |
| RAM Channels | 8+300% | 2 |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128+357% | 28 |
Advanced Features
Only the Ryzen 9 9850HX has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Ryzen 9 9850HX supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (EPYC 7F72) vs VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V (Ryzen 9 9850HX). The Ryzen 9 9850HX includes integrated graphics (AMD Radeon 610M), while the EPYC 7F72 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: EPYC 7F72 rivals Xeon Platinum 8260; Ryzen 9 9850HX rivals Core Ultra 7 255HX.
| Feature | EPYC 7F72 | Ryzen 9 9850HX |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | None | AMD Radeon 610M |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












