To get the index we compare the characteristics of the processors and their cost, taking into account the cost of other processors.
AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX vs Ryzen 9 5950X
Price now
3635$
Games supported
100%
- Interface
- Core clock speed
- Max video memory
- Memory type
- Memory clock speed
- Maximum resolution
- Interface
- Core clock speed
- Max video memory
- Memory type
- Memory clock speed
- Maximum resolution
Price now
740$
Games supported
100%
General info
Comparing Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Ryzen 9 5950X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance rating | 26 | 64 |
| Value for money | 8.90 | 48.86 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Ryzen Threadripper | AMD Ryzen 9 |
| Architecture codename | Matisse (2019−2020) | Vermeer (Zen3) (2020) |
| Release date | 14 July 2020 (2 years ago) | 8 October 2020 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $799 |
| Current price | $3635 | $740 (0.9x MSRP) |
Value for money
Technical specs
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Ryzen 9 5950X 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 | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 64 | 32 |
| Base clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 3.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.2 GHz | 4.9 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 128 MB | 64 MB |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 7 nm |
| Die size | 74 mm2 | 2x 80.7 + 125 (I/O) mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 95 °C | 95 °C |
| Number of transistors | 3,800 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Ryzen 9 5950X 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 | sWRX8 | AM4 |
| Thermal design power (TDP) | 280 Watt | 105 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Ryzen 9 5950X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, 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 | 86x MMX(+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A,-64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA, Precision Boost 2 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Ryzen 9 5950X are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Ryzen 9 5950X. Depending on the motherboards, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200 | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | 2 TiB | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 126.38 GB/s | 51.196 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | no data | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | - | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Ryzen 9 5950X.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | 4.0 |
Benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Overall 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.
- Passmark
- Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
- Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
- 3DMark06 CPU
- wPrime 32
- Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core
- Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
- Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core
- Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core
- TrueCrypt AES
- WinRAR 4.0
- x264 encoding pass 2
- x264 encoding pass 1
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%
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%
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%
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%
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
Benchmark coverage: 18%
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%
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core (sometimes called Multi-Thread) is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
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%
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%
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%
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: 12%
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: 12%
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: 12%
Advantages and disadvantages
| Performance rating | 62.37 | 45.49 |
| Novelty | 14 July 2020 | 8 October 2020 |
| Boost clock speed | 4200 | 4900 |
| Base clock speed | 3500 | 3400 |
| Thermal design power (TDP) | 280 Watt | 105 Watt |
Judging by the results of synthetic and gaming tests, Technical City recommends
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Ryzen 9 5950X, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Competitors of Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX by Intel
We believe that the nearest equivalent to Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX by Intel is Core i9-13900K, which is slower by 13% and lower by 15 positions in our rating.
Here are some closest Intel rivals to Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX:
Competitors of Ryzen 9 5950X by Intel
We believe that the nearest equivalent to Ryzen 9 5950X by Intel is Core i9-12900KS, which is slower by 2% and lower by 2 positions in our rating.
Here are some closest Intel rivals to Ryzen 9 5950X:
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.
