
EPYC 9755

EPYC 9845
EPYC 9755 vs EPYC 9845 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 9755 vs EPYC 9845 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 9755 vs EPYC 9845: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
EPYC 9755
2024Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +10.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+60% larger total L3 cache (512 MB vs 320 MB).
- ✅Costs $580 less on MSRP ($12,984 MSRP vs $13,564 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 13.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 12.8 vs 11.3 PassMark/$ ($12,984 MSRP vs $13,564 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌28.2% higher power demand at 500W vs 390W.
EPYC 9845
2024Why buy it
- ✅Draws 390W instead of 500W, a 110W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than EPYC 9755 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (152,985 vs 166,328).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (320 MB vs 512 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 11.3 vs 12.8 PassMark/$ ($13,564 MSRP vs $12,984 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is EPYC 9755 better than EPYC 9845?
Which one is better for gaming?
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 9755 vs EPYC 9845 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

EPYC 9755
The EPYC 9755 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 128 cores and 256 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 GHz. L3 cache: 512 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 500 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 166,328 points. Launch price was $12,984.

EPYC 9845
The EPYC 9845 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 160 cores and 320 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 320 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 390 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 152,985 points. Launch price was $13,564.
Processing Power
The EPYC 9755 packs 128 cores / 256 threads, while the EPYC 9845 offers 160 cores / 320 threads — the EPYC 9845 has 32 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.1 GHz on the EPYC 9755 versus 3.7 GHz on the EPYC 9845 — a 10.3% clock advantage for the EPYC 9755 (base: 2.7 GHz vs 2.1 GHz). Both are built on the Turin (2024) architecture using a 4 nm process. In PassMark, the EPYC 9755 scores 166,328 against the EPYC 9845's 152,985 — a 8.4% lead for the EPYC 9755. L3 cache: 512 MB (total) on the EPYC 9755 vs 320 MB (total) on the EPYC 9845.
| Feature | EPYC 9755 | EPYC 9845 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 128 / 256 | 160 / 320+25% |
| Boost Clock | 4.1 GHz+11% | 3.7 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.7 GHz+29% | 2.1 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 512 MB (total)+60% | 320 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | 4 nm | 3 nm-25% |
| Architecture | Turin (2024) | Turin (2024) |
| PassMark | 166,328+9% | 152,985 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,800 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 29,300 | — |
Memory & Platform
Both processors use the SP5 socket with PCIe 5.0. Both support up to DDR5-6000 memory speed. The EPYC 9755 supports up to 9 TB of RAM compared to 6 TB — 50% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 12-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9755) and SP5 (EPYC 9845).
| Feature | EPYC 9755 | EPYC 9845 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP5 | SP5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0 | PCIe 5.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-6000 | DDR5-6000 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 9 TB+50% | 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 9755 targets Data Center / Cloud Computing, EPYC 9845 targets Data Center / AI Training. Direct competitor: EPYC 9755 rivals Xeon 6980P; EPYC 9845 rivals Xeon 6972P.
| Feature | EPYC 9755 | EPYC 9845 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V, SEV-SNP | AMD-V, SEV-SNP |
| Target Use | Data Center / Cloud Computing | Data Center / AI Training |
Value Analysis
At launch, the EPYC 9755 was priced at $12984, while the EPYC 9845 came in at $13564. On launch pricing ($12984 vs $13564), EPYC 9755 was $580 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9755 delivers 12.8 pts/$ vs 11.3 pts/$ for the EPYC 9845 — making the EPYC 9755 the 12.7% better value option.
| Feature | EPYC 9755 | EPYC 9845 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $12984-4% | $13564 |
| Performance per Dollar | 12.8+13% | 11.3 |
| Release Date | 2024 | 2024 |
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.















