EPYC 9275F vs Xeon w9-3495X

CPU

GPU

EPYC 9275F

24 Cores48 Thrd320 WWMax: 4.8 GHz2024

EPYC family

·······

Buy on Amazon

Xeon w9-3495X

56 Cores112 Thrd350 WWMax: 4.8 GHz2023

Similar parts

Buy on Amazon

EPYC 9275F vs Xeon w9-3495X Performance Spectrum

EPYC 9275F

24 / 48

84,620

0.0%

Ryzen 9 PRO 7945

Ryzen 9 9900X3D

Ryzen 9 9950X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7980X

Xeon w9-3495X

56 / 112

90,441

+6.9%

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 9275F vs Xeon w9-3495X 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 9275F vs Xeon w9-3495X: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

EPYC 9275F

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+143.8% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 105 MB).
✅Costs $2,450 less on MSRP ($3,439 MSRP vs $5,889 MSRP).
✅Delivers 60.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 24.6 vs 15.4 PassMark/$ ($3,439 MSRP vs $5,889 MSRP).
✅Draws 320W instead of 350W, a 30W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (84,620 vs 90,441).

Xeon w9-3495X

2023

Why buy it

✅+6.9% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9275F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (105 MB vs 256 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.4 vs 24.6 PassMark/$ ($5,889 MSRP vs $3,439 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9275F better than Xeon w9-3495X?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, EPYC 9275F is ahead with a 5.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Xeon w9-3495X pulls ahead with 6.9% better PassMark. EPYC 9275F also has the bigger cache pool with 143.8% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 105 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon w9-3495X is the stronger fit. You are getting 6.9% better PassMark, backed by 56 cores and 112 threads.

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

EPYC 9275F is the better buy right now. EPYC 9275F comes in $2,450 cheaper on MSRP at $3,439 MSRP versus $5,889 MSRP, and it still gives you a 5.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Xeon w9-3495X is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 6.9% better PassMark. It is also 60.2% better value on MSRP (24.6 vs 15.4 PassMark/$), 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 9275F makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2023) and 143.8% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 105 MB). That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

EPYC 9275F vs Xeon w9-3495X Technical Specifications

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

EPYC 9275F

The EPYC 9275F is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 4.1 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 256 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: 84,620 points. Launch price was $3,439.

Xeon w9-3495X

The Xeon w9-3495X 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 56 cores and 112 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 105 MB. L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4677. Thermal design power (TDP): 350 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 90,441 points. Launch price was $5,889.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9275F packs 24 cores / 48 threads, while the Xeon w9-3495X offers 56 cores / 112 threads — the Xeon w9-3495X has 32 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the EPYC 9275F versus 4.8 GHz on the Xeon w9-3495X — identical boost frequencies (base: 4.1 GHz vs 1.9 GHz). The EPYC 9275F uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Xeon w9-3495X uses Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9275F scores 84,620 against the Xeon w9-3495X's 90,441 — a 6.7% lead for the Xeon w9-3495X. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9275F vs 105 MB on the Xeon w9-3495X.

Feature	EPYC 9275F	Xeon w9-3495X
Cores / Threads	24 / 48	56 / 112+133%
Boost Clock	4.8 GHz	4.8 GHz
Base Clock	4.1 GHz+116%	1.9 GHz
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)+144%	105 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	84,620	90,441+7%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	72,560
Geekbench 6 Single	—	2,136
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	18,600

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9275F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon w9-3495X uses LGA4677 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 6000 on the EPYC 9275F versus DDR5-4800 on the Xeon w9-3495X — the EPYC 9275F supports 25% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9275F supports up to 6144 GB of RAM compared to 4096 GB — 50% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9275F) vs 8 (Xeon w9-3495X). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9275F) vs 112 (Xeon w9-3495X) — the EPYC 9275F offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9275F) and W790 (Xeon w9-3495X).

Feature	EPYC 9275F	Xeon w9-3495X
Socket	SP5	LGA4677
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	6000+25%	DDR5-4800
Max RAM Capacity	6144 GB+50%	4096 GB
RAM Channels	12+50%	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+14%	112

🔧

Advanced Features

Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9275F) vs true (Xeon w9-3495X). Primary use case: Xeon w9-3495X targets Ultimate Workstation. Direct competitor: EPYC 9275F rivals Xeon 6980P; Xeon w9-3495X rivals Threadripper PRO 7995WX.

Feature	EPYC 9275F	Xeon w9-3495X
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d, SEV-SNP	true
Target Use	—	Ultimate Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the EPYC 9275F was priced at $3439, while the Xeon w9-3495X came in at $5889. On launch pricing ($3439 vs $5889), EPYC 9275F was $2450 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9275F delivers 24.6 pts/$ vs 15.4 pts/$ for the Xeon w9-3495X — making the EPYC 9275F the 46.3% better value option.

Feature	EPYC 9275F	Xeon w9-3495X
MSRP	$3439-42%	$5889
Performance per Dollar	24.6+60%	15.4
Release Date	2024	2023

Search EPYC 9275F on Amazon

Search Xeon w9-3495X 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.