EPYC 9374F vs Xeon Max 9480

EPYC 9374F vs Xeon Max 9480 Performance Spectrum

EPYC 9374F

32 / 64

82,009

0.0%

Ryzen 9 5950X

Ryzen Threadripper 3960X

Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

Ryzen 9 9950X3D

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7980X

Xeon Max 9480

56 / 112

82,913

+1.1%

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 9374F vs Xeon Max 9480 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 9374F vs Xeon Max 9480: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

EPYC 9374F

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +31.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+127.6% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 113 MB).
✅Costs $8,130 less on MSRP ($4,850 MSRP vs $12,980 MSRP).
✅Delivers 164.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 16.9 vs 6.4 PassMark/$ ($4,850 MSRP vs $12,980 MSRP).
✅Draws 320W instead of 350W, a 30W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (82,009 vs 82,913).

Xeon Max 9480

2023

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9374F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (113 MB vs 256 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 6.4 vs 16.9 PassMark/$ ($12,980 MSRP vs $4,850 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9374F better than Xeon Max 9480?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, EPYC 9374F is ahead with a 31.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Xeon Max 9480 pulls ahead with 1.1% better PassMark. EPYC 9374F also has the bigger cache pool with 127.6% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 113 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon Max 9480 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 56 cores and 112 threads.

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

EPYC 9374F is the better buy right now. EPYC 9374F comes in $8,130 cheaper on MSRP at $4,850 MSRP versus $12,980 MSRP, and it still gives you a 31.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Xeon Max 9480 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 1.1% better PassMark. It is also 164.7% better value on MSRP (16.9 vs 6.4 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Xeon Max 9480 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2022) and more multi-core headroom with 56 cores / 112 threads instead of 32/64. That extra cache should keep paying off in CPU-limited games and high-refresh builds.

EPYC 9374F vs Xeon Max 9480 Technical Specifications

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

EPYC 9374F

The EPYC 9374F 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 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 3.85 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 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: 82,009 points. Launch price was $4,850.

Xeon Max 9480

The Xeon Max 9480 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 10 January 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Sapphire Rapids HBM (2023) architecture. It features 56 cores and 112 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 112.5 MB. L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4677. Thermal design power (TDP): 350 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 82,913 points. Launch price was $12,980.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9374F packs 32 cores / 64 threads, while the Xeon Max 9480 offers 56 cores / 112 threads — the Xeon Max 9480 has 24 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the EPYC 9374F versus 3.5 GHz on the Xeon Max 9480 — a 20.5% clock advantage for the EPYC 9374F (base: 3.85 GHz vs 1.9 GHz). The EPYC 9374F uses the Genoa (2022−2023) architecture (5 nm, 6 nm), while the Xeon Max 9480 uses Sapphire Rapids HBM (2023) (10 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9374F scores 82,009 against the Xeon Max 9480's 82,913 — a 1.1% lead for the Xeon Max 9480. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9374F vs 112.5 MB on the Xeon Max 9480.

Feature	EPYC 9374F	Xeon Max 9480
Cores / Threads	32 / 64	56 / 112+75%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+23%	3.5 GHz
Base Clock	3.85 GHz+103%	1.9 GHz
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)+128%	112.5 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	2 MB (per core)+100%
Process	5 nm, 6 nm-50%	10 nm
Architecture	Genoa (2022−2023)	Sapphire Rapids HBM (2023)
PassMark	82,009	82,913+1%
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,900
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	55,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9374F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon Max 9480 uses LGA4677 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to 4800 memory speed. The EPYC 9374F supports up to 6144 GB of RAM compared to 4096 GB — 50% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9374F) vs 8 (Xeon Max 9480). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9374F) vs 80 (Xeon Max 9480) — the EPYC 9374F offers 48 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9374F) and C741 (Xeon Max 9480).

Feature	EPYC 9374F	Xeon Max 9480
Socket	SP5	LGA4677
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	4800	DDR5-4800
Max RAM Capacity	6144 GB+50%	4096 GB
RAM Channels	12+50%	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+60%	80

🔧

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, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9374F) vs VT-x, VT-d (Xeon Max 9480). Primary use case: Xeon Max 9480 targets HPC Server. Direct competitor: EPYC 9374F rivals Xeon Platinum 8480+; Xeon Max 9480 rivals EPYC 9684X.

Feature	EPYC 9374F	Xeon Max 9480
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d, SEV-SNP	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	—	HPC Server

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the EPYC 9374F was priced at $4850, while the Xeon Max 9480 came in at $12980. On launch pricing ($4850 vs $12980), EPYC 9374F was $8130 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9374F delivers 16.9 pts/$ vs 6.4 pts/$ for the Xeon Max 9480 — making the EPYC 9374F the 90.3% better value option.

Feature	EPYC 9374F	Xeon Max 9480
MSRP	$4850-63%	$12980
Performance per Dollar	16.9+164%	6.4
Release Date	2022	2023

Search EPYC 9374F on Amazon

Search Xeon Max 9480 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.