EPYC 9575F vs EPYC 9965

EPYC 9575F vs EPYC 9965 Performance Spectrum

EPYC 9575F

64 / 128

147,718

0.0%

Ryzen 9 7900X3D

Ryzen 9 9950X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX

EPYC 9965

192 / 384

160,778

+8.8%

Ryzen 7 7700X

Ryzen 9 9900X

Ryzen 9 9950X3D

Ryzen Threadripper 7960X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9970X

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX

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 9575F vs EPYC 9965 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 9575F vs EPYC 9965: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

EPYC 9575F

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +37.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $3,022 less on MSRP ($11,791 MSRP vs $14,813 MSRP).
✅Delivers 15.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 12.5 vs 10.9 PassMark/$ ($11,791 MSRP vs $14,813 MSRP).
✅Draws 400W instead of 500W, a 100W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (147,718 vs 160,778).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (256 MB vs 384 MB).

EPYC 9965

2024

Why buy it

✅+8.8% higher PassMark.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 256 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9575F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.9 vs 12.5 PassMark/$ ($14,813 MSRP vs $11,791 MSRP).
❌25% higher power demand at 500W vs 400W.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9575F better than EPYC 9965?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, EPYC 9575F is ahead with a 37.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9965 pulls ahead with 8.8% better PassMark. EPYC 9965 also has the bigger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 256 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9965 is the stronger fit. You are getting 8.8% better PassMark, backed by 192 cores and 384 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 256 MB).

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

EPYC 9575F is the better buy right now. EPYC 9575F comes in $3,022 cheaper on MSRP at $11,791 MSRP versus $14,813 MSRP, and it still gives you a 37.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that EPYC 9965 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 8.8% better PassMark. It is also 15.4% better value on MSRP (12.5 vs 10.9 PassMark/$), 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 9965 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 50% larger total L3 cache (384 MB vs 256 MB) and more multi-core headroom with 192 cores / 384 threads instead of 64/128. That extra cache should keep paying off in CPU-limited games and high-refresh builds.

EPYC 9575F vs EPYC 9965 Technical Specifications

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

EPYC 9575F

The EPYC 9575F is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 5 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: 147,718 points. Launch price was $11,791.

EPYC 9965

The EPYC 9965 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 192 cores and 384 threads. Base frequency is 2.25 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 384 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 500 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 160,778 points. Launch price was $14,813.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 9575F packs 64 cores / 128 threads, while the EPYC 9965 offers 192 cores / 384 threads — the EPYC 9965 has 128 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5 GHz on the EPYC 9575F versus 3.7 GHz on the EPYC 9965 — a 29.9% clock advantage for the EPYC 9575F (base: 3.3 GHz vs 2.25 GHz). Both are built on the Turin (2024) architecture using a 4 nm process. In PassMark, the EPYC 9575F scores 147,718 against the EPYC 9965's 160,778 — a 8.5% lead for the EPYC 9965. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9575F vs 384 MB (total) on the EPYC 9965.

Feature	EPYC 9575F	EPYC 9965
Cores / Threads	64 / 128	192 / 384+200%
Boost Clock	5 GHz+35%	3.7 GHz
Base Clock	3.3 GHz+47%	2.25 GHz
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)	384 MB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	1 MB (per core)
Process	4 nm	3 nm-25%
Architecture	Turin (2024)	Turin (2024)
PassMark	147,718	160,778+9%
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,520
Geekbench 6 Multi	29,308	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

Both processors use the SP5 socket with PCIe 5.0. Both support up to DDR5-6000 memory speed. Both support up to 6 TB of RAM. Both feature 12-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9575F) and SP5 (EPYC 9965).

Feature	EPYC 9575F	EPYC 9965
Socket	SP5	SP5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6000	DDR5-6000
Max RAM Capacity	6 TB	6 TB
RAM Channels	12	12
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128	128

🔧

Advanced Features

Both support AMD-V, SEV-SNP virtualization. Primary use case: EPYC 9575F targets Data Center / High Frequency, EPYC 9965 targets Data Center / High Density. Direct competitor: EPYC 9575F rivals Xeon 6952P; EPYC 9965 rivals Xeon 6980P.

Feature	EPYC 9575F	EPYC 9965
Integrated GPU	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V, SEV-SNP	AMD-V, SEV-SNP
Target Use	Data Center / High Frequency	Data Center / High Density

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the EPYC 9575F was priced at $11791, while the EPYC 9965 came in at $14813. On launch pricing ($11791 vs $14813), EPYC 9575F was $3022 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9575F delivers 12.5 pts/$ vs 10.9 pts/$ for the EPYC 9965 — making the EPYC 9575F the 14.3% better value option.

Feature	EPYC 9575F	EPYC 9965
MSRP	$11791-20%	$14813
Performance per Dollar	12.5+15%	10.9
Release Date	2024	2024

Search EPYC 9575F on Amazon

Search EPYC 9965 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.