Ryzen Threadripper 1920X vs EPYC 8224P
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 8224P outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 1920X by an impressive 96% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 236 | 626 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 30.62 | 3.32 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | AMD Ryzen Threadripper |
| Power efficiency | 6.84 | 3.10 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |
| Architecture codename | Siena (2023−2024) | Zen (2017−2020) |
| Release date | 18 September 2023 (2 years ago) | 10 August 2017 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $855 | $799 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
EPYC 8224P has 822% better value for money than Ryzen Threadripper 1920X.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
EPYC 8224P and Ryzen Threadripper 1920X 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 | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 48 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | 2.55 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 4.2 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 35 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 64 MB (shared) | 32 MB |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 2x 73 mm2 | 213 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 75 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 17,750 million | 9,600 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 8224P and Ryzen Threadripper 1920X 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 | 1 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | SP6 | SP3r2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 160 Watt | 180 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 8224P and Ryzen Threadripper 1920X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 8224P and Ryzen Threadripper 1920X are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 8224P and Ryzen Threadripper 1920X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR4 Quad-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 2 TiB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 4 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 85.33 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 8224P and Ryzen Threadripper 1920X.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 96 | 60 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 25.71 | 13.10 |
| Recency | 18 September 2023 | 10 August 2017 |
| Physical cores | 24 | 12 |
| Threads | 48 | 24 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 160 Watt | 180 Watt |
EPYC 8224P has a 96.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 12.5% lower power consumption.
The AMD EPYC 8224P is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X in performance tests.
Be aware that EPYC 8224P is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen Threadripper 1920X is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
