AMD EPYC 9575F vs AMD EPYC 9845 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data reveals a stark split between throughput-oriented workloads and latency-sensitive tasks. Across the 17 recorded comparisons, the AMD EPYC 9845 claims 14 wins, while the AMD EPYC 9575F takes 3. The margins, however, tell the real story.

In Cinebench tests, the 9845 edges ahead by a consistent 1.8% in every single iteration, from R15 multicore (13107 vs 12876) through R23 singlecore (18358 vs 18033). That uniformity suggests the advantage comes from raw core count rather than architectural supremacy. The 9845's 160 cores versus 64 cores for the 9575F should produce a much larger multicore gap, yet the 9575F's higher clocks narrow the field dramatically.

The PassMark suite shows where the 9845 truly dominates. Data compression scores 4,680,013 versus 2,773,634, a 68.7% advantage. Data encryption widens further to 82.3% (296,808 vs 162,818). Floating point math reaches an 86% delta (978,377 vs 526,003), and integer math peaks at 89.2% (1,687,531 vs 891,817). Extended instructions land at 59.4% (314,798 vs 197,484), while random string sorting shows a 54.4% gap (538,060 vs 348,500). These are workloads that scale with core count, and the 9845's 160 threads of headroom (320 total threads versus 128) deliver proportionally.

The 9575F fights back in single-threaded and physics-bound tests. PassMark single thread scores 4,173 versus 3,144, a 24.7% advantage for the 9575F. Physics also favors the 9575F at 20,652 versus 19,631, a 4.9% lead. Find prime numbers shows a narrow 3.3% margin for the 9845 (1255 vs 1215), and multithread lands at just 3.4% (152,985 vs 147,998). The 9575F's 5.00 GHz boost clock versus 3.70 GHz on the 9845 explains these results.

Notably, the 9845's average benchmark score sits at 523,613, placing it at the 100th percentile of all CPUs. The 9575F averages 311,774, ranking at the 99th percentile. The 9845's nearest rivals include the EPYC 9755 at 3.5% behind and the EPYC 9965 at 15.6% ahead, while the 9575F trades blows with the EPYC 9734 (0.4% behind), Intel Xeon 6781P (1.2% ahead), and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX (2.8% ahead).

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct deployment profiles. The AMD EPYC 9845 is the clear choice for massively parallel, compute-bound environments. Its 89.2% lead in integer math and 86% lead in floating point math indicate workloads like scientific simulation, financial modeling, and data analytics will see near-doubling of throughput. The 68.7% compression advantage and 82.3% encryption advantage make it suitable for database compression pipelines and large-scale encryption tasks. The 9845 also leads in every Cinebench test, though by a modest 1.8%, meaning even lightly threaded rendering tasks gain a small edge.

The AMD EPYC 9575F is the pick for single-threaded responsiveness and lightly threaded server workloads. Its 24.7% single-thread advantage over the 9845 is substantial, and the 4.9% physics lead suggests better performance in simulation steps that rely on a few fast cores. The 9575F's 5.00 GHz boost clock makes it attractive for latency-sensitive applications where per-core speed matters more than total throughput.

The 9845 wins 14 of 17 head-to-head tests, but the 9575F wins the three that matter most for certain workloads. Neither processor is universally superior; the choice hinges on whether the workload scales across 160 cores or needs maximum clock speed. The 9845's percentile rank of 100 versus 99 for the 9575F reflects overall average performance, but the single-thread gap is too large to ignore for specific use cases.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the Zen 5 architecture and the Turin codename, but they target different tiers within that design. The 9845 is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC, while the 9575F uses a 4 nm process at the same foundry. The 9845's generation is listed as EPYC (Zen 5c (Turin)), indicating a dense variant, whereas the 9575F is EPYC (Zen 5 (Turin)), the standard implementation.

The 9845 packs 160 cores and 320 threads, compared to 64 cores and 128 threads on the 9575F. Cache configurations differ accordingly. Both have 80 KB L1 per core and 1 MB L2 per core, but the 9845 provides 320 MB of shared L3 versus 256 MB on the 9575F. The 9575F's die is composed of 8x 70.6 mm² chiplets with 66,520 million transistors; the 9845's die size and transistor count are not recorded in the database.

Clock speeds tell the opposite story. The 9845 runs at a 2.10 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost, while the 9575F starts at 3.30 GHz base and reaches 5.00 GHz boost. The 9575F's higher clocks compensate for fewer cores in many benchmarks, but the 9845's dense design leverages additional cores for throughput. Both processors use DDR5 memory with a twelve-channel bus and 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, support ECC memory, and provide PCIe Gen 5 with 128 CPU-only lanes.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge on core count, threads, clocks, TDP, process node, L3 cache, and launch MSRP. The 9845 offers 160 cores and 320 threads versus 64 cores and 128 threads for the 9575F. Base clock differs by 1.20 GHz (2.10 vs 3.30), boost clock by 1.30 GHz (3.70 vs 5.00). The 9845 draws 390 W TDP, the 9575F draws 400 W. Process node is 3 nm for the 9845 and 4 nm for the 9575F. Shared L3 cache is 320 MB versus 256 MB. Launch MSRP is $13564 for the 9845 and $11791 for the 9575F. Both share the same socket, memory support, memory bus, memory bandwidth, ECC capability, PCIe configuration, integrated graphics (N/A), market segment, and production status. Both released on 2024-10-09 and are not multiplier unlocked.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD EPYC 9845 has 160 cores and 320 threads, while the AMD EPYC 9575F has 64 cores and 128 threads.

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference?

A: The AMD EPYC 9575F scores 4,173 in PassMark single thread versus 3,144 for the 9845, a 24.7% advantage for the 9575F.

Q: How do they compare in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The 9845 scores 130,037 versus 127,739 for the 9575F, a 1.8% margin in favor of the 9845.

Q: Which processor is better for integer math workloads?

A: The 9845 scores 1,687,531 in PassMark integer math versus 891,817 for the 9575F, a 89.2% lead for the 9845.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The 9845 runs at 2.10 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost; the 9575F runs at 3.30 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost.

Q: How many head-to-head tests does each processor win?

A: The 9845 wins 14 of 17 comparisons, while the 9575F wins 3.