Ryzen 9 3900X vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 1950 by a considerable 47% 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 | 708 | 398 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 16.84 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | AMD Ryzen 9 |
| Power efficiency | 2.96 | 6.27 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Zen (2017−2020) | Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) |
| Release date | 29 July 2017 (8 years ago) | 7 July 2019 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $499 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Ryzen 9 3900X 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 | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 32 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | 3.2 GHz | 3.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.2 GHz | 4.6 GHz |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 768 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 6 MB |
| L3 cache | 32 MB | 64 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 7 nm, 12 nm |
| Die size | 213 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 95 °C |
| Number of transistors | 9,600 million | 19,200 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Ryzen 9 3900X 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 | SP3r2 | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 105 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Ryzen 9 3900X. 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 Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Ryzen 9 3900X are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Ryzen 9 3900X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Quad-channel | DDR4 Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 51.196 GB/s |
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 | 12.61 | 18.57 |
| Recency | 29 July 2017 | 7 July 2019 |
| Physical cores | 16 | 12 |
| Threads | 32 | 24 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 105 Watt |
Ryzen Threadripper 1950 has 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads.
Ryzen 9 3900X, on the other hand, has a 47.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 71.4% lower power consumption.
The AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
