Ryzen Threadripper 1950X vs Ryzen 9 3900

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 9 3900
2019
12 cores / 24 threads, 65 Watt
19.39
+11.6%
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
2017
16 cores / 32 threads, 180 Watt
17.38

Ryzen 9 3900 outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 1950X by a moderate 12% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 9 3900 and Ryzen Threadripper 1950X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking289358
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation20.014.89
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Matisse (Ryzen 3000 Desktop)AMD Ryzen Threadripper
Power efficiency28.239.14
Architecture codenameMatisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)Zen (2017−2020)
Release date24 September 2019 (5 years ago)10 August 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499$999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 9 3900 has 309% better value for money than Ryzen Threadripper 1950X.

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 9 3900 and Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 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 cores12 (Dodeca-Core)16 (Hexadeca-Core)
Threads2432
Base clock speed3.1 GHz3.4 GHz
Boost clock speed4.3 GHz4 GHz
Bus rateno data4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplierno data34
L1 cache64 KB (per core)96K (per core)
L2 cache512 KB (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache64 MB32 MB
Chip lithography7 nm, 12 nm14 nm
Die size2x 74 mm2213 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data68 °C
Number of transistors7,600 million9,600 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 9 3900 and Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 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 configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
SocketAM4SP3r2
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt180 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 9 3900 and Ryzen Threadripper 1950X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x MMX(+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A,-64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA, Precision Boost 2SSE4.2, SSE4A, AMD-V, AES, AVX2, FMA3, SHA
AES-NI++
AVX++
Precision Boost 2+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 9 3900 and Ryzen Threadripper 1950X are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 9 3900 and Ryzen Threadripper 1950X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR4 Quad-channel
Maximum memory size128 GB2 TiB
Max memory channels24
Maximum memory bandwidth51.196 GB/s85.33 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/A-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 9 3900 and Ryzen Threadripper 1950X.

PCIe version4.03.0
PCI Express lanes2460

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Ryzen 9 3900 19.39
+11.6%
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 17.38

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.

Ryzen 9 3900 30803
+11.6%
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 27613

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Ryzen 9 3900 1680
+41.5%
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 1187

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Ryzen 9 3900 9558
+18.1%
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 8090

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Ryzen 9 3900 5700
+19.9%
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 4754

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Ryzen 9 3900 44191
+5.7%
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 41814

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Ryzen 9 3900 31
+33.9%
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 23

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Ryzen 9 3900 2804
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 2997
+6.9%

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Ryzen 9 3900 197
+23.9%
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 159

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Ryzen 9 3900 2.22
+28.3%
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 1.73

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Ryzen 9 3900 10.4
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 19
+82.7%

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Ryzen 9 3900 132
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 134
+1.8%

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Ryzen 9 3900 256
+34.8%
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 190

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Ryzen 9 3900 7145
+72.2%
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 4150

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Ryzen 9 3900 10190
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 11237
+10.3%

Blender(-)

Ryzen 9 3900 179
+9.8%
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 163

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Ryzen 9 3900 1246
+21.1%
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 1029

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 19.39 17.38
Recency 24 September 2019 10 August 2017
Physical cores 12 16
Threads 24 32
Chip lithography 7 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 180 Watt

Ryzen 9 3900 has a 11.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 176.9% lower power consumption.

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X, on the other hand, has 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads.

The Ryzen 9 3900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 9 3900 and Ryzen Threadripper 1950X, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Ryzen 9 3900
Ryzen 9 3900
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.6 623 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 3900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 155 votes

Rate Ryzen Threadripper 1950X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 9 3900 or Ryzen Threadripper 1950X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.