
EPYC 9174F

Xeon w7-2575X
EPYC 9174F vs Xeon w7-2575X 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 9174F vs Xeon w7-2575X 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 9174F vs Xeon w7-2575X: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
EPYC 9174F
2022Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +10.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $1,495 less on MSRP ($194 MSRP vs $1,689 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 759.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 269.3 vs 31.4 PassMark/$ ($194 MSRP vs $1,689 MSRP).
- ✅100% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 64) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (52,249 vs 52,951).
- ❌28% higher power demand at 320W vs 250W.
Xeon w7-2575X
2024Why buy it
- ✅+1.3% higher PassMark.
- ✅Draws 250W instead of 320W, a 70W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9174F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 31.4 vs 269.3 PassMark/$ ($1,689 MSRP vs $194 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is Xeon w7-2575X better than EPYC 9174F?
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 9174F vs Xeon w7-2575X Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

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.

Xeon w7-2575X
The Xeon w7-2575X is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 August 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) architecture. It features 22 cores and 44 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 45 MB. L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4677. Thermal design power (TDP): 250 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 52,951 points. Launch price was $1,689.
Processing Power
The EPYC 9174F packs 16 cores / 32 threads, while the Xeon w7-2575X offers 22 cores / 44 threads — the Xeon w7-2575X has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the EPYC 9174F versus 4.8 GHz on the Xeon w7-2575X — a 8.7% clock advantage for the Xeon w7-2575X (base: 4.1 GHz vs 3 GHz). The EPYC 9174F uses the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture (5 nm, 6 nm), while the Xeon w7-2575X uses Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9174F scores 52,249 against the Xeon w7-2575X's 52,951 — a 1.3% lead for the Xeon w7-2575X. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9174F vs 45 MB on the Xeon w7-2575X.
| Feature | EPYC 9174F | Xeon w7-2575X |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 16 / 32 | 22 / 44+38% |
| Boost Clock | 4.4 GHz | 4.8 GHz+9% |
| Base Clock | 4.1 GHz+37% | 3 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 256 MB (total)+469% | 45 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core)+100% |
| Process | 5 nm, 6 nm-29% | Intel 7 nm |
| Architecture | Genoa (2022−2023) | Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) |
| PassMark | 52,249 | 52,951+1% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 2,300 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 19,640 |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 9174F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon w7-2575X uses LGA4677 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to 4800 memory speed. The EPYC 9174F supports up to 6144 GB of RAM compared to 2048 GB — 200% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9174F) vs 4 (Xeon w7-2575X). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9174F) vs 64 (Xeon w7-2575X) — the EPYC 9174F offers 64 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9174F) and Intel W790 (Xeon w7-2575X).
| Feature | EPYC 9174F | Xeon w7-2575X |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP5 | LGA4677 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0 | PCIe 5.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | 4800 | DDR5-4800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 6144 GB+200% | 2048 GB |
| RAM Channels | 12+200% | 4 |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128+100% | 64 |
Advanced Features
Only the Xeon w7-2575X has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (EPYC 9174F) vs true (Xeon w7-2575X). Direct competitor: EPYC 9174F rivals Xeon Platinum 8468; Xeon w7-2575X rivals Threadripper PRO 7965WX.
| Feature | EPYC 9174F | Xeon w7-2575X |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | None | None |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | Yes | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | true |
Value Analysis
At launch, the EPYC 9174F was priced at $194, while the Xeon w7-2575X came in at $1689. On launch pricing ($194 vs $1689), EPYC 9174F was $1495 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9174F delivers 269.3 pts/$ vs 31.4 pts/$ for the Xeon w7-2575X — making the EPYC 9174F the 158.3% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 9174F | Xeon w7-2575X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $194-89% | $1689 |
| Performance per Dollar | 269.3+758% | 31.4 |
| Release Date | 2022 | 2024 |
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.
















