EPYC 9135 vs Xeon W-3365

CPU

GPU

EPYC 9135

16 Cores32 Thrd200 WWMax: 4.3 GHz2024

EPYC family

·······

Buy on Amazon

Xeon W-3365

32 Cores64 Thrd270 WWMax: 4 GHz2021

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

EPYC 9135 vs Xeon W-3365 Performance Spectrum

EPYC 9135

16 / 32

57,808

+0.9%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Ryzen Threadripper 7970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Xeon W-3365

32 / 64

57,312

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 9135 vs Xeon W-3365 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 9135 vs Xeon W-3365: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

EPYC 9135

2024

Why buy it

✅+0.9% higher PassMark.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 48 MB).
✅Costs $2,285 less on MSRP ($1,214 MSRP vs $3,499 MSRP).
✅Delivers 190.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 47.6 vs 16.4 PassMark/$ ($1,214 MSRP vs $3,499 MSRP).
✅Draws 200W instead of 270W, a 70W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3365 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Xeon W-3365

2021

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (57,312 vs 57,808).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (48 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 16.4 vs 47.6 PassMark/$ ($3,499 MSRP vs $1,214 MSRP).
❌35% higher power demand at 270W vs 200W.
❌Older platform position on LGA4189 with DDR4, while EPYC 9135 moves to SP5 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9135 better than Xeon W-3365?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Xeon W-3365 is ahead with a 5.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9135 pulls ahead with 0.9% better PassMark. EPYC 9135 also has the bigger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 48 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9135 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.9% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 48 MB).

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

EPYC 9135 is the better buy right now. EPYC 9135 comes in $2,285 cheaper on MSRP at $1,214 MSRP versus $3,499 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.9% better PassMark. The compromise is that Xeon W-3365 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 5.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 190.7% better value on MSRP (47.6 vs 16.4 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

EPYC 9135 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2021), a healthier platform with SP5 and DDR5 instead of LGA4189, 33.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 48 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 32 threads instead of 32/64. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

EPYC 9135 vs Xeon W-3365 Technical Specifications

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

EPYC 9135

The EPYC 9135 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.65 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 200 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 57,808 points. Launch price was $1,214.

Xeon W-3365

The Xeon W-3365 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2021-07-29. It is based on the Ice Lake-W (2021) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 48 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: 57,312 points. Launch price was $3,499.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9135 packs 16 cores / 32 threads, while the Xeon W-3365 offers 32 cores / 64 threads — the Xeon W-3365 has 16 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the EPYC 9135 versus 4 GHz on the Xeon W-3365 — a 7.2% clock advantage for the EPYC 9135 (base: 3.65 GHz vs 2.7 GHz). The EPYC 9135 uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Xeon W-3365 uses Ice Lake-W (2021) (10 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9135 scores 57,808 against the Xeon W-3365's 57,312 — a 0.9% lead for the EPYC 9135. L3 cache: 64 MB (total) on the EPYC 9135 vs 48 MB (total) on the Xeon W-3365.

Feature	EPYC 9135	Xeon W-3365
Cores / Threads	16 / 32	32 / 64+100%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+7%	4 GHz
Base Clock	3.65 GHz+35%	2.7 GHz
L3 Cache	64 MB (total)+33%	48 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	1 MB (per core)
Process	4 nm-60%	10 nm
Architecture	Turin (2024)	Ice Lake-W (2021)
PassMark	57,808	57,312
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,960
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	16,817

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9135 uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon W-3365 uses LGA4189 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 6000 on the EPYC 9135 versus DDR4-3200 on the Xeon W-3365 — the EPYC 9135 supports 87.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9135 supports up to 6144 GB of RAM compared to 4096 GB — 50% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9135) vs 8 (Xeon W-3365). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9135) vs 64 (Xeon W-3365) — the EPYC 9135 offers 64 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9135) and Intel C621A (Xeon W-3365).

Feature	EPYC 9135	Xeon W-3365
Socket	SP5	LGA4189
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	6000+88%	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	6144 GB+50%	4096 GB
RAM Channels	12+50%	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+100%	64

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (EPYC 9135) vs true (Xeon W-3365). Direct competitor: EPYC 9135 rivals Xeon Platinum 8558P; Xeon W-3365 rivals EPYC 7543.

Feature	EPYC 9135	Xeon W-3365
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	true

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the EPYC 9135 was priced at $1214, while the Xeon W-3365 came in at $3499. On launch pricing ($1214 vs $3499), EPYC 9135 was $2285 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9135 delivers 47.6 pts/$ vs 16.4 pts/$ for the Xeon W-3365 — making the EPYC 9135 the 97.6% better value option.

Feature	EPYC 9135	Xeon W-3365
MSRP	$1214-65%	$3499
Performance per Dollar	47.6+190%	16.4
Release Date	2024	2021

Search EPYC 9135 on Amazon

Search Xeon W-3365 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.