Ryzen Threadripper 2950X vs Opteron 250
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen Threadripper 2950X outperforms Opteron 250 by a whopping 4416% 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 | 3278 | 445 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 6.43 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | AMD Ryzen Threadripper |
| Power efficiency | 0.45 | 9.95 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | no data | GlobalFoundries |
| Architecture codename | SledgeHammer (2003−2005) | ZEN+ (2018−2019) |
| Release date | December 2004 (20 years ago) | 13 August 2018 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $12 | $899 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Opteron 250 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 32 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 4.4 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 35 |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 32 MB |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 12 nm |
| Die size | 193 mm2 | 213 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 106 million | 19,200 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Opteron 250 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X 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 | 2 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | 940 | Socket TR4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 180 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Opteron 250 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X. 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 Opteron 250 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Opteron 250 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 Quad-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 2 TiB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 4 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 93.867 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
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 | 0.37 | 16.71 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 16 |
| Threads | 1 | 32 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 180 Watt |
Opteron 250 has 102.2% lower power consumption.
Ryzen Threadripper 2950X, on the other hand, has a 4416.2% higher aggregate performance score, 1500% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 983.3% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Opteron 250 in performance tests.
Be aware that Opteron 250 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen Threadripper 2950X 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.
