AMD EPYC 9115 vs AMD Ryzen 7 9700F Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and AMD EPYC 9115 are both Zen 5 parts, but they are engineered for entirely different arenas. The data is unambiguous: the EPYC 9115 wins 9 of 11 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the Ryzen 7 9700F takes only 2. However, those two wins are decisive and define the product split. The EPYC 9115 is the undisputed multi-threaded throughput champion, while the Ryzen 7 9700F is the clear single-thread leader with a 39.6% advantage in that specific metric.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F is the pick for single-threaded dominance. Its PassMark single-thread score of 4691 dwarfs the EPYC 9115’s 3360, a 39.6% lead that directly translates to snappier desktop responsiveness and faster execution of lightly-threaded applications. This is a desktop processor, and the data reflects that focus: its 5.50 GHz boost clock versus the EPYC’s 4.10 GHz is the primary driver. The 9700F also holds a significant advantage in average benchmark score, posting 69996 against the EPYC’s 69288, a 1% delta that places it higher in its nearest rival group.

The AMD EPYC 9115 is the absolute winner in every multi-threaded and throughput-oriented test in the data set. It wins PassMark integer math with a score of 181807 versus 120788, a 33.6% margin, and floating-point math with 113853 versus 77955, a 31.5% margin. The EPYC’s lead extends to data compression (600099 vs 421988, 29.7%), data encryption (33489 vs 21488, 35.8%), extended instructions (45477 vs 33688, 25.9%), and random string sorting (70151 vs 45890, 34.6%). Its 16 cores and 32 threads, double the 9700F’s 8 cores and 16 threads, provide the raw parallelism needed for server workloads. The EPYC also wins the PassMark physics test with 4188 versus 2122, a massive 49.3% lead, and the multithread test with 48936 versus 36470, a 25.5% advantage.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on TSMC’s 4 nm process and use the Zen 5 architecture, but they are different dies. The Ryzen 7 9700F is a single-die design codenamed Granite Ridge, with a die size of 70.6 mm² and 8,315 million transistors. The EPYC 9115, codenamed Turin, is a dual-die design, listed as 2x 70.6 mm², with a total of 16,630 million transistors. This doubling of silicon directly enables its core count advantage.

The cache hierarchy differs significantly. Both have 80 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, but the L3 cache is doubled on the EPYC: 64 MB shared versus 32 MB shared on the Ryzen. Memory support is another major divergence. The Ryzen 7 9700F uses a dual-channel DDR5 memory bus providing 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The EPYC 9115 uses a twelve-channel DDR5 memory bus with a massive 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth, a 6.4x increase. This memory bandwidth is critical for server applications that move large data sets.

The socket and platform are entirely different. The Ryzen uses AMD Socket AM5, while the EPYC uses AMD Socket SP5. The EPYC also offers a vastly larger PCIe footprint: 128 lanes of Gen 5 versus 24 lanes on the Ryzen. Both support ECC memory. The Ryzen has an unlocked multiplier, while the EPYC is locked. The Ryzen is a 65 W TDP part, while the EPYC is rated at 125 W TDP. The release dates also differ, with the EPYC launching on 2024-10-09 and the Ryzen on 2025-09-15.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The EPYC 9115’s dominance is most pronounced in the physics test. Its score of 4188 is 49.3% higher than the Ryzen’s 2122. This test simulates rigid body dynamics, a workload that scales almost linearly with core count, and the EPYC’s 16 cores provide the necessary parallelism.

In integer math, the EPYC scores 181807, a 33.6% improvement over the Ryzen’s 120788. This is a fundamental throughput metric for general computing and server tasks. The single-thread test is the sole exception to EPYC’s rule. The Ryzen 7 9700F scores 4691, which is 39.6% higher than the EPYC’s 3360. This score reflects the Ryzen’s higher boost clock and is the defining metric for desktop performance.

The multithread test, which is a composite of many parallel workloads, shows the EPYC ahead with 48936 versus 36470, a 25.5% margin. The data compression test follows a similar pattern, with the EPYC scoring 600099 against 421988, a 29.7% lead. The encryption test shows a 35.8% EPYC advantage (33489 vs 21488), indicating its strength in cryptographic workloads. The extended instructions test, which measures CPU extensions like SSE and AVX, shows a 25.9% EPYC lead (45477 vs 33688). Even the find prime numbers test, often sensitive to single-thread speed, goes to the EPYC with 289 versus 183, a 36.7% margin, likely due to its higher core count.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher single-thread performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 9700F wins the PassMark single-thread test with a score of 4691, which is 39.6% higher than the AMD EPYC 9115’s score of 3360.

Q: Is the EPYC 9115 faster in multi-threaded workloads?

A: Yes. The EPYC 9115 wins the PassMark multithread test with a score of 48936, a 25.5% lead over the Ryzen 7 9700F’s 36470. It also wins all other multi-threaded tests in the data set.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The EPYC 9115 has 16 cores and 32 threads, exactly double the Ryzen 7 9700F’s 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The EPYC 9115 has a twelve-channel DDR5 memory bus with 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Ryzen 7 9700F has a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s.

Q: Which processor was released earlier?

A: The AMD EPYC 9115 was released on 2024-10-09, while the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F was released later on 2025-09-15.

Q: Do both CPUs support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F and the AMD EPYC 9115 have ECC memory support listed in their specifications.

The Verdict

Choose the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F if your priority is single-thread performance and desktop responsiveness. Its 39.6% lead in the PassMark single-thread test over the EPYC 9115 is the largest margin in the entire comparison. Its higher boost clock of 5.50 GHz, lower TDP of 65 W, and unlocked multiplier make it the appropriate choice for a desktop system on Socket AM5. Its average benchmark score of 69996 is higher than the EPYC’s 69288, and its nearest rivals are all high-end desktop parts like the Intel Core i7-14700KF and AMD Ryzen 9 7950X, confirming its position in the consumer space.

Choose the AMD EPYC 9115 if you need maximum multi-threaded throughput and massive I/O. It wins 9 out of 11 benchmarks, with its largest victory being a 49.3% lead in the physics test. Its 16 cores, 32 threads, 576.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes make it a server/workstation processor. Its nearest rivals include the Ryzen 7 9700F, but its performance profile is defined by multi-threaded wins, not single-thread speed. The data clearly states that the EPYC is for parallel workloads that can utilize all of its cores and memory bandwidth.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 7 9700F | AMD EPYC 9115 |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Cores | 8 | 16 |

| Threads | 16 | 32 |

| Base Clock | 3.80 GHz | 2.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.50 GHz | 4.10 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 125 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | AMD Socket SP5 |

| Codename | Granite Ridge | Turin |

| Die Size | 70.6 mm² | 2x 70.6 mm² |

| Transistors | 8,315 million | 16,630 million |

| L3 Cache | 32 MB (shared) | 64 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Twelve-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 576.0 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 24 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 128 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Release Date | 2025-09-15 | 2024-10-09 |

| Launch MSRP | $289 | $726 |