EPYC 9534 vs Xeon Max 9480

CPU

GPU

EPYC 9534

64 Cores128 Thrd280 WWMax: 3.7 GHz2022

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Xeon Max 9480

56 Cores112 Thrd350 WWMax: 3.5 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

EPYC 9534

64 / 128

89,077

+7.4%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX

Ryzen 9 7945HX3D

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7970X

Ryzen Threadripper 9970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7980X

Xeon Max 9480

56 / 112

82,913

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.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

EPYC 9534

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+127.6% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 113 MB).
✅Costs $4,177 less on MSRP ($8,803 MSRP vs $12,980 MSRP).
✅Delivers 58.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 10.1 vs 6.4 PassMark/$ ($8,803 MSRP vs $12,980 MSRP).
✅Draws 280W instead of 350W, a 70W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (15,500 vs 55,000).

Xeon Max 9480

2023

Why buy it

✅+254.8% higher Geekbench multi-core.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9534 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (113 MB vs 256 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 6.4 vs 10.1 PassMark/$ ($12,980 MSRP vs $8,803 MSRP).
❌25% higher power demand at 350W vs 280W.

EPYC 9534

2022

Xeon Max 9480

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+127.6% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 113 MB).
✅Costs $4,177 less on MSRP ($8,803 MSRP vs $12,980 MSRP).
✅Delivers 58.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 10.1 vs 6.4 PassMark/$ ($8,803 MSRP vs $12,980 MSRP).
✅Draws 280W instead of 350W, a 70W reduction.

Why buy it

✅+254.8% higher Geekbench multi-core.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (15,500 vs 55,000).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9534 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (113 MB vs 256 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 6.4 vs 10.1 PassMark/$ ($12,980 MSRP vs $8,803 MSRP).
❌25% higher power demand at 350W vs 280W.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9534 better than Xeon Max 9480?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, EPYC 9534 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 Max 9480 pulls ahead with 254.8% better Geekbench multi-core. EPYC 9534 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 better fit. You are getting 254.8% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 56 cores and 112 threads.

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

EPYC 9534 is the smarter buy today. EPYC 9534 is $4,177 cheaper on MSRP at $8,803 MSRP versus $12,980 MSRP, and it gives you a 5.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Xeon Max 9480 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 254.8% better Geekbench multi-core. It is also 58.4% better value on MSRP (10.1 vs 6.4 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

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

Xeon Max 9480 is the more future-proof choice 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 64/128. That extra cache should hold up really well in CPU-limited games and high-refresh builds.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

EPYC 9534 Benchmark Check

Xeon Max 9480 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 9534	Xeon Max 9480
1080p
low	170 FPS	186 FPS
medium	141 FPS	168 FPS
high	122 FPS	135 FPS
ultra	96 FPS	109 FPS
1440p
low	148 FPS	153 FPS
medium	119 FPS	129 FPS
high	97 FPS	98 FPS
ultra	77 FPS	81 FPS
4K
low	70 FPS	71 FPS
medium	59 FPS	63 FPS
high	47 FPS	48 FPS
ultra	39 FPS	40 FPS

Open EPYC 9534 Open Xeon Max 9480

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 9534	Xeon Max 9480
1080p
low	524 FPS	246 FPS
medium	457 FPS	221 FPS
high	365 FPS	184 FPS
ultra	296 FPS	146 FPS
1440p
low	431 FPS	205 FPS
medium	385 FPS	187 FPS
high	317 FPS	160 FPS
ultra	250 FPS	124 FPS
4K
low	265 FPS	128 FPS
medium	241 FPS	119 FPS
high	211 FPS	103 FPS
ultra	176 FPS	83 FPS

Open EPYC 9534 Open Xeon Max 9480

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 9534	Xeon Max 9480
1080p
low	671 FPS	815 FPS
medium	560 FPS	738 FPS
high	522 FPS	704 FPS
ultra	454 FPS	624 FPS
1440p
low	511 FPS	725 FPS
medium	425 FPS	652 FPS
high	389 FPS	609 FPS
ultra	337 FPS	548 FPS
4K
low	376 FPS	487 FPS
medium	293 FPS	398 FPS
high	262 FPS	354 FPS
ultra	210 FPS	294 FPS

Open EPYC 9534 Open Xeon Max 9480

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 9534	Xeon Max 9480
1080p
low	902 FPS	1066 FPS
medium	822 FPS	953 FPS
high	708 FPS	813 FPS
ultra	623 FPS	670 FPS
1440p
low	724 FPS	885 FPS
medium	631 FPS	761 FPS
high	540 FPS	646 FPS
ultra	461 FPS	532 FPS
4K
low	519 FPS	644 FPS
medium	464 FPS	565 FPS
high	407 FPS	494 FPS
ultra	350 FPS	413 FPS

Open EPYC 9534 Open Xeon Max 9480

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 9534 and Xeon Max 9480

EPYC 9534

The EPYC 9534 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 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 2.45 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 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): 280 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 89,077 points. Launch price was $8,803.

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 9534 packs 64 cores / 128 threads, while the Xeon Max 9480 offers 56 cores / 112 threads — the EPYC 9534 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the EPYC 9534 versus 3.5 GHz on the Xeon Max 9480 — a 5.6% clock advantage for the EPYC 9534 (base: 2.45 GHz vs 1.9 GHz). The EPYC 9534 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 9534 scores 89,077 against the Xeon Max 9480's 82,913 — a 7.2% lead for the EPYC 9534. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,650 vs 1,900, a 14.1% lead for the Xeon Max 9480 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 15,500 vs 55,000 (112.1% advantage for the Xeon Max 9480). L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9534 vs 112.5 MB on the Xeon Max 9480.

Feature	EPYC 9534	Xeon Max 9480
Cores / Threads	64 / 128+14%	56 / 112
Boost Clock	3.7 GHz+6%	3.5 GHz
Base Clock	2.45 GHz+29%	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	89,077+7%	82,913
Geekbench 6 Single	1,650	1,900+15%
Geekbench 6 Multi	15,500	55,000+255%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9534 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 DDR5-4800 memory speed. The EPYC 9534 supports up to 6144 GB of RAM compared to 4096 GB — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9534) vs 8 (Xeon Max 9480). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 9534) vs 80 (Xeon Max 9480) — the EPYC 9534 offers 48 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9534) and C741 (Xeon Max 9480).

Feature	EPYC 9534	Xeon Max 9480
Socket	SP5	LGA4677
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-4800	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: AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9534) vs VT-x, VT-d (Xeon Max 9480). Primary use case: EPYC 9534 targets Server, Xeon Max 9480 targets HPC Server. Direct competitor: EPYC 9534 rivals Xeon Platinum 8470; Xeon Max 9480 rivals EPYC 9684X.

Feature	EPYC 9534	Xeon Max 9480
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	AMD-V, SEV-SNP	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	Server	HPC Server

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 9534 launched at $8803 MSRP, while the Xeon Max 9480 debuted at $12980. On MSRP ($8803 vs $12980), the EPYC 9534 is $4177 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9534 delivers 10.1 pts/$ vs 6.4 pts/$ for the Xeon Max 9480 — making the EPYC 9534 the 45.2% better value option.