Processor 300 vs Ryzen Threadripper 1940X
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen Threadripper 1940X and Processor 300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 1319 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | no data | 9.27 |
| Architecture codename | Zen (2017−2020) | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 29 July 2017 (7 years ago) | 8 January 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $82 |
Detailed specifications
Ryzen Threadripper 1940X and Processor 300 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 | 14 (Tetradeca-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 28 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 3.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4 GHz | 3.9 GHz |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 32 MB | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 213 mm2 | 163 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 9,600 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen Threadripper 1940X and Processor 300 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 |
| Socket | SP3r2 | 1700 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 46 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1940X and Processor 300. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
Security technologies
Ryzen Threadripper 1940X and Processor 300 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1940X and Processor 300 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1940X and Processor 300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Quad-channel | DDR4, DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel UHD Graphics 710 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1940X and Processor 300.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 29 July 2017 | 8 January 2024 |
| Physical cores | 14 | 2 |
| Threads | 28 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 46 Watt |
Ryzen Threadripper 1940X has 600% more physical cores and 600% more threads.
Processor 300, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 291.3% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Ryzen Threadripper 1940X and Processor 300. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen Threadripper 1940X and Processor 300, 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.
