EPYC 9175F
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX
EPYC 9175F vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX 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 9175F vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX 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 9175F vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
EPYC 9175F
2024Why buy it
- ✅+300% larger total L3 cache (512 MB vs 128 MB).
- ✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of sWRX8 and DDR4.
- ✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (65,894 vs 66,614).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.5 vs 27.8 PassMark/$ ($4,256 MSRP vs $2,399 MSRP).
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX
2022Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +8.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $1,857 less on MSRP ($2,399 MSRP vs $4,256 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 79.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 27.8 vs 15.5 PassMark/$ ($2,399 MSRP vs $4,256 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 280W instead of 320W, a 40W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 512 MB).
- ❌Older platform position on sWRX8 with DDR4, while EPYC 9175F moves to SP5 and DDR5.
- ❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX better than EPYC 9175F?
Which one is better for gaming?
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 9175F vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
EPYC 9175F
The EPYC 9175F 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 4.2 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 512 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 320 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 65,894 points. Launch price was $4,256.
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX
The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2022-03-08. It is based on the Chagall PRO (2022) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4.5 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm process technology. Socket: sWRX8. Thermal design power (TDP): 280 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 66,614 points. Launch price was $2,399.
Processing Power
The EPYC 9175F packs 16 cores / 32 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5 GHz on the EPYC 9175F versus 4.5 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX — a 10.5% clock advantage for the EPYC 9175F (base: 4.2 GHz vs 3.8 GHz). The EPYC 9175F uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX uses Chagall PRO (2022) (7 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9175F scores 65,894 against the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX's 66,614 — a 1.1% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX. L3 cache: 512 MB (total) on the EPYC 9175F vs 128 MB on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX.
| Feature | EPYC 9175F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 16 / 32 | 24 / 48+50% |
| Boost Clock | 5 GHz+11% | 4.5 GHz |
| Base Clock | 4.2 GHz+11% | 3.8 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 512 MB (total)+300% | 128 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 512K (per core)+51100% |
| Process | 4 nm-43% | 7 nm |
| Architecture | Turin (2024) | Chagall PRO (2022) |
| PassMark | 65,894 | 66,614+1% |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 45,000 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 1,550 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 15,500 |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 9175F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX uses sWRX8 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 6400 on the EPYC 9175F versus DDR4-3200 on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX — the EPYC 9175F supports 100% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9175F supports up to 4096 GB of RAM compared to 2048 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9175F) vs 8 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX). Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9175F) and WRX80 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX).
| Feature | EPYC 9175F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP5 | sWRX8 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | 6400+100% | DDR4-3200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4096 GB+100% | 2048 GB |
| RAM Channels | 12+50% | 8 |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128 | 128 |
Advanced Features
Only the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the EPYC 9175F supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (EPYC 9175F) vs AMD-V (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX). Primary use case: Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX targets Professional Workstation. Direct competitor: EPYC 9175F rivals Xeon 6972P; Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX rivals Xeon Gold 6430.
| Feature | EPYC 9175F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | None | None |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | Yes | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | AMD-V |
| Target Use | — | Professional Workstation |
Value Analysis
At launch, the EPYC 9175F was priced at $4256, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX came in at $2399. On launch pricing ($4256 vs $2399), Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX was $1857 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9175F delivers 15.5 pts/$ vs 27.8 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX — making the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX the 56.8% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 9175F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $4256 | $2399-44% |
| Performance per Dollar | 15.5 | 27.8+79% |
| Release Date | 2024 | 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 9175F and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX
