Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX vs Ryzen 9 3900

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 9 3900
2019
12 cores / 24 threads, 65 Watt
19.92
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX
2020
32 cores / 64 threads, 280 Watt
40.55
+104%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX outperforms Ryzen 9 3900 by a whopping 104% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 9 3900 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking25957
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation27.7427.18
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
SeriesAMD Matisse (Ryzen 3000 Desktop)AMD Ryzen Threadripper
Architecture codenameMatisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)Matisse (2019−2020)
Release date24 September 2019 (4 years ago)14 July 2020 (4 years ago)
Current price$408 $1350

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 9 3900 has 2% better value for money than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX.

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 9 3900 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 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)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads2464
Base clock speed3.1 GHz3.5 GHz
Boost clock speed4.3 GHz4.2 GHz
L1 cache768 KB2 MB
L2 cache6 MB16 MB
L3 cache64 MB128 MB
Chip lithography7 nm, 12 nm7 nm, 12 nm
Die size2x 74 mm274 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data95 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data95 °C
Number of transistors7,600 million23540 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierYesYes

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 9 3900 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 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
SocketAM4sWRX8
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt280 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 9 3900 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX. 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 2MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AES, AVX, AVX2, BMI1, BMI2, SHA, F16C, FMA3, AMD64, EVP, AMD-V, SMAP, SMEP, SMT, Precision Boost 2, XFR 2
AES-NI++
AVX++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 9 3900 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 9 3900 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size128 GB2 TiB
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth51.196 GB/s204.8 GB/s
ECC memory support-no data

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 PRO 3975WX.

PCIe version4.04.0
PCI Express lanes24128

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 19.92
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 40.55
+104%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX outperforms Ryzen 9 3900 by 104% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Ryzen 9 3900 30818
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 62720
+104%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX outperforms Ryzen 9 3900 by 104% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Ryzen 9 3900 1648
+0.2%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 1645

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Ryzen 9 3900 9496
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 14543
+53.1%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX outperforms Ryzen 9 3900 by 53% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

Ryzen 9 3900 5700
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 5884
+3.2%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX outperforms Ryzen 9 3900 by 3% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Ryzen 9 3900 44191
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 53924
+22%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX outperforms Ryzen 9 3900 by 22% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Ryzen 9 3900 13817
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 16923
+22.5%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX outperforms Ryzen 9 3900 by 22% in 3DMark06 CPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Ryzen 9 3900 31
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 52
+68.6%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX outperforms Ryzen 9 3900 by 69% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Ryzen 9 3900 2804
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 7053
+152%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX outperforms Ryzen 9 3900 by 152% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Ryzen 9 3900 197
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 201
+2%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX outperforms Ryzen 9 3900 by 2% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Ryzen 9 3900 2.22
+1.4%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 2.19

Ryzen 9 3900 outperforms Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX by 1% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Ryzen 9 3900 10.4
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 27
+160%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX outperforms Ryzen 9 3900 by 160% in TrueCrypt AES.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Ryzen 9 3900 7145
+9.4%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 6530

Ryzen 9 3900 outperforms Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX by 9% in WinRAR 4.0.

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.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Ryzen 9 3900 132
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 193
+46.3%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX outperforms Ryzen 9 3900 by 46% in x264 encoding pass 2.

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.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Ryzen 9 3900 256
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 268
+4.9%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX outperforms Ryzen 9 3900 by 5% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 19.92 40.55
Recency 24 September 2019 14 July 2020
Physical cores 12 32
Threads 24 64
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 280 Watt

Ryzen 9 3900 has 330.8% lower power consumption.

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX, on the other hand, has a 103.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 months, and 166.7% more physical cores and 166.7% more threads.

The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 9 3900 in performance tests.

Note that Ryzen 9 3900 is a desktop processor while Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 9 3900 and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX, 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 PRO 3975WX
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX

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.


4.6 571 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 88 votes

Rate Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX 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 PRO 3975WX, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.