EPYC 9475F
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX
EPYC 9475F vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX 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 Threadripper PRO 9975WX 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 Threadripper PRO 9975WX: 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
- ✅+45.2% higher Geekbench multi-core.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 16.1 vs 25.9 PassMark/$ ($7,592 MSRP vs $4,099 MSRP).
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +6.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $3,493 less on MSRP ($4,099 MSRP vs $7,592 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 60.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 25.9 vs 16.1 PassMark/$ ($4,099 MSRP vs $7,592 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (31,000 vs 45,000).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 256 MB).
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX 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 Threadripper PRO 9975WX 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 Threadripper PRO 9975WX
The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 23 July 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Shimada Peak (2025) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 4 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: sTR5. Thermal design power (TDP): 350 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 106,263 points. Launch price was $4,099.
Processing Power
The EPYC 9475F packs 48 cores / 96 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX offers 32 cores / 64 threads — the EPYC 9475F has 16 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the EPYC 9475F versus 5.4 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX — a 11.8% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX (base: 3.65 GHz vs 4 GHz). The EPYC 9475F uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX uses Shimada Peak (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9475F scores 122,476 against the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX's 106,263 — a 14.2% lead for the EPYC 9475F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,960 vs 3,200, a 48.1% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 45,000 vs 31,000 (36.8% advantage for the EPYC 9475F). L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9475F vs 128 MB (total) on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX.
| Feature | EPYC 9475F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 48 / 96+50% | 32 / 64 |
| Boost Clock | 4.8 GHz | 5.4 GHz+13% |
| Base Clock | 3.65 GHz | 4 GHz+10% |
| L3 Cache | 256 MB (total)+100% | 128 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | 4 nm | 4 nm |
| Architecture | Turin (2024) | Shimada Peak (2025) |
| PassMark | 122,476+15% | 106,263 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 83,982 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,960 | 3,200+63% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 45,000+45% | 31,000 |
Memory & Platform
The EPYC 9475F uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX uses sTR5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6000 on the EPYC 9475F versus DDR5-6400 on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX supports 6.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9475F supports up to 6144 GB of RAM compared to 2048 GB — 200% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9475F) vs 8 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX). Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9475F) and WRX90,TRX50 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX).
| Feature | EPYC 9475F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP5 | sTR5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-6000 | DDR5-6400+7% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 6144 GB+200% | 2048 GB |
| RAM Channels | 12+50% | 8 |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 128 | 128 |
Advanced Features
Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: AMD-V (EPYC 9475F) vs true (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX). Primary use case: EPYC 9475F targets Server, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX targets High-end Workstation. Direct competitor: EPYC 9475F rivals Xeon 6952P; Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX rivals Xeon w7-3465X.
| Feature | EPYC 9475F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | None | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | Yes | Yes |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | true |
| Target Use | Server | High-end Workstation |
Value Analysis
At launch, the EPYC 9475F was priced at $7592, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX came in at $4099. On launch pricing ($7592 vs $4099), Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX was $3493 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9475F delivers 16.1 pts/$ vs 25.9 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX — making the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX the 46.6% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 9475F | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $7592 | $4099-46% |
| Performance per Dollar | 16.1 | 25.9+61% |
| Release Date | 2024 | 2025 |
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 Threadripper PRO 9975WX
