EPYC 9475F
Ryzen 9 5900X
EPYC 9475F vs Ryzen 9 5900X 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 9475F vs Ryzen 9 5900X 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 9475F vs Ryzen 9 5900X: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
EPYC 9475F
2024Why buy it
- ✅+278.5% higher Geekbench multi-core.
- ✅+300% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 64 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 48 cores / 96 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 24.
- ✅Newer platform on SP5 with DDR5 support instead of AM4 and DDR4.
- ✅433.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 5900X across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 16.1 vs 71.0 PassMark/$ ($7,592 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
- ❌281% higher power demand at 400W vs 105W.
Ryzen 9 5900X
2020Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +3.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $7,043 less on MSRP ($549 MSRP vs $7,592 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 339.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 71.0 vs 16.1 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $7,592 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 105W instead of 400W, a 295W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,888 vs 45,000).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (64 MB vs 256 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 9475F, which brings 48 cores / 96 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
- ❌Older platform position on AM4 with DDR4, while EPYC 9475F moves to SP5 and DDR5.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen 9 5900X better than EPYC 9475F?
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 9475F vs Ryzen 9 5900X Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
EPYC 9475F
The EPYC 9475F is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 48 cores and 96 threads. Base frequency is 3.65 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): 400 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 122,476 points. Launch price was $7,592.
Ryzen 9 5900X
The Ryzen 9 5900X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 5 November 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 38,955 points. Launch price was $549.
Processing Power
The EPYC 9475F packs 48 cores / 96 threads, while the Ryzen 9 5900X offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the EPYC 9475F has 36 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the EPYC 9475F versus 4.8 GHz on the Ryzen 9 5900X — identical boost frequencies (base: 3.65 GHz vs 3.7 GHz). The EPYC 9475F uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Ryzen 9 5900X uses Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022) (7 nm, 12 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9475F scores 122,476 against the Ryzen 9 5900X's 38,955 — a 103.5% lead for the EPYC 9475F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,960 vs 2,174, a 10.4% lead for the Ryzen 9 5900X that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 45,000 vs 11,888 (116.4% advantage for the EPYC 9475F). L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9475F vs 64 MB on the Ryzen 9 5900X.
| Feature | EPYC 9475F | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 48 / 96+300% | 12 / 24 |
| Boost Clock | 4.8 GHz | 4.8 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.65 GHz | 3.7 GHz+1% |
| L3 Cache | 256 MB (total)+300% | 64 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 512K (per core)+51100% |
| Process | 4 nm-43% | 7 nm, 12 nm |
| Architecture | Turin (2024) | Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022) |
| PassMark | 122,476+214% | 38,955 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 21,000 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,960 | 2,174+11% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 45,000+279% | 11,888 |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 9475F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen 9 5900X uses AM4 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6000 on the EPYC 9475F versus DDR4-3200 on the Ryzen 9 5900X — the EPYC 9475F supports 87.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9475F supports up to 6144 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 4700% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9475F) vs 2 (Ryzen 9 5900X). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9475F) vs 24 (Ryzen 9 5900X) — the EPYC 9475F offers 104 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9475F) and A320,B350,X370,B450,X470,B550,X570 (Ryzen 9 5900X).
| Feature | EPYC 9475F | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP5 | AM4 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-6000+88% | DDR4-3200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 6144 GB+4700% | 128 GB |
| RAM Channels | 12+500% | 2 |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128+433% | 24 |
Advanced Features
Only the Ryzen 9 5900X has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the EPYC 9475F supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support AMD-V virtualization. Primary use case: EPYC 9475F targets Server, Ryzen 9 5900X targets Workstation. Direct competitor: EPYC 9475F rivals Xeon 6952P; Ryzen 9 5900X rivals Core i9-12900K.
| Feature | EPYC 9475F | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | None | — |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | Yes | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Server | Workstation |
Value Analysis
At launch, the EPYC 9475F was priced at $7592, while the Ryzen 9 5900X came in at $549. On launch pricing ($7592 vs $549), Ryzen 9 5900X was $7043 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9475F delivers 16.1 pts/$ vs 71.0 pts/$ for the Ryzen 9 5900X — making the Ryzen 9 5900X the 125.9% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 9475F | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $7592 | $549-93% |
| Performance per Dollar | 16.1 | 71.0+341% |
| Release Date | 2024 | 2020 |
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 9475F and Ryzen 9 5900X
