EPYC 9175F vs Xeon w9-3475X

CPU

GPU

EPYC 9175F

16 Cores32 Thrd320 WWMax: 5 GHz2024

EPYC family

·······

Buy on Amazon

Xeon w9-3475X

36 Cores72 Thrd300 WWMax: 4.8 GHz2023

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

EPYC 9175F vs Xeon w9-3475X Performance Spectrum

EPYC 9175F

16 / 32

65,894

+1.3%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Xeon w9-3475X

36 / 72

65,077

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 9175F vs Xeon w9-3475X 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 9175F vs Xeon w9-3475X: 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

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +9.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅14.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 112) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.5 vs 17.4 PassMark/$ ($4,256 MSRP vs $3,739 MSRP).

Xeon w9-3475X

2023

Why buy it

✅Costs $517 less on MSRP ($3,739 MSRP vs $4,256 MSRP).
✅Delivers 12.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 17.4 vs 15.5 PassMark/$ ($3,739 MSRP vs $4,256 MSRP).
✅Draws 300W instead of 320W, a 20W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9175F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (65,077 vs 65,894).

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9175F better than Xeon w9-3475X?

Yes. EPYC 9175F is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 9.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 1.3% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, EPYC 9175F is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 9.6% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests. It also has a clear cache advantage at 512 MB versus 83 MB.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9175F is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.3% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 520.6% larger total L3 cache (512 MB vs 83 MB).

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

EPYC 9175F is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon w9-3475X is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. EPYC 9175F comes in 13.8% more expensive on MSRP at $4,256 MSRP versus $3,739 MSRP, and it still gives you a 9.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Xeon w9-3475X is also 12.4% better value on MSRP (17.4 vs 15.5 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

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

EPYC 9175F makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2023), 3D V-Cache and a much larger 512 MB L3 cache instead of 83 MB, and more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 32 threads instead of 36/72. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

EPYC 9175F vs Xeon w9-3475X 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.

Xeon w9-3475X

The Xeon w9-3475X is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 February 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) architecture. It features 36 cores and 72 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 82.5 MB. L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4677. Thermal design power (TDP): 300 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 65,077 points. Launch price was $3,739.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9175F packs 16 cores / 32 threads, while the Xeon w9-3475X offers 36 cores / 72 threads — the Xeon w9-3475X has 20 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5 GHz on the EPYC 9175F versus 4.8 GHz on the Xeon w9-3475X — a 4.1% clock advantage for the EPYC 9175F (base: 4.2 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The EPYC 9175F uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Xeon w9-3475X uses Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9175F scores 65,894 against the Xeon w9-3475X's 65,077 — a 1.2% lead for the EPYC 9175F. L3 cache: 512 MB (total) on the EPYC 9175F vs 82.5 MB on the Xeon w9-3475X.

Feature	EPYC 9175F	Xeon w9-3475X
Cores / Threads	16 / 32	36 / 72+125%
Boost Clock	5 GHz+4%	4.8 GHz
Base Clock	4.2 GHz+91%	2.2 GHz
L3 Cache	512 MB (total)+521%	82.5 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	2 MB (per core)+100%
Process	4 nm-43%	Intel 7 nm
Architecture	Turin (2024)	Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024)
PassMark	65,894+1%	65,077
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,814
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	44,869

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9175F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon w9-3475X uses LGA4677 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 6400 on the EPYC 9175F versus DDR5-4800 on the Xeon w9-3475X — the EPYC 9175F supports 33.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 4096 GB of RAM. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9175F) vs 8 (Xeon w9-3475X). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9175F) vs 112 (Xeon w9-3475X) — the EPYC 9175F offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9175F) and W790 (Xeon w9-3475X).

Feature	EPYC 9175F	Xeon w9-3475X
Socket	SP5	LGA4677
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	6400+33%	DDR5-4800
Max RAM Capacity	4096 GB	4096 GB
RAM Channels	12+50%	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+14%	112

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Xeon w9-3475X 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 9175F) vs true (Xeon w9-3475X). Direct competitor: EPYC 9175F rivals Xeon 6972P; Xeon w9-3475X rivals Threadripper PRO 7965WX.

Feature	EPYC 9175F	Xeon w9-3475X
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 9175F was priced at $4256, while the Xeon w9-3475X came in at $3739. On launch pricing ($4256 vs $3739), Xeon w9-3475X was $517 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9175F delivers 15.5 pts/$ vs 17.4 pts/$ for the Xeon w9-3475X — making the Xeon w9-3475X the 11.7% better value option.

Feature	EPYC 9175F	Xeon w9-3475X
MSRP	$4256	$3739-12%
Performance per Dollar	15.5	17.4+12%
Release Date	2024	2023

Search EPYC 9175F on Amazon

Search Xeon w9-3475X 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.