Ryzen Threadripper 1950 vs Apple M4 Max (16 cores)
Aggregate performance score
Apple M4 Max (16 cores) outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 1950 by a whopping 101% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Apple M4 Max (16 cores) and Ryzen Threadripper 1950 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 168 | 533 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Apple M4 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 29.41 | 7.31 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Zen (2017−2020) |
| Release date | 30 October 2024 (less than a year ago) | 29 July 2017 (7 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Apple M4 Max (16 cores) and Ryzen Threadripper 1950 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 16 | 32 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.51 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 32 MB |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | no data | 213 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 9,600 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Apple M4 Max (16 cores) and Ryzen Threadripper 1950 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | no data | 1 |
| Socket | no data | SP3r2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 90 Watt | 180 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Apple M4 Max (16 cores) and Ryzen Threadripper 1950. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Apple M4 Max (16 cores) and Ryzen Threadripper 1950 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Apple M4 Max (16 cores) and Ryzen Threadripper 1950. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 Quad-channel |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Apple M4 40-core GPU | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 27.97 | 13.90 |
| Recency | 30 October 2024 | 29 July 2017 |
| Threads | 16 | 32 |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 90 Watt | 180 Watt |
Apple M4 Max (16 cores) has a 101.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.
Ryzen Threadripper 1950, on the other hand, has 100% more threads.
The Apple M4 Max (16 cores) is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen Threadripper 1950 in performance tests.
Be aware that Apple M4 Max (16 cores) is a notebook processor while Ryzen Threadripper 1950 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Apple M4 Max (16 cores) and Ryzen Threadripper 1950, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
