Xeon Platinum 8368 vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX
2022
12 cores / 24 threads, 280 Watt
25.58
Xeon Platinum 8368
2021
38 cores / 76 threads, 270 Watt
58.17
+127%

Xeon Platinum 8368 outperforms Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX by a whopping 127% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX and Xeon Platinum 8368 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19220
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesAMD Ryzen Threadripperno data
Power efficiency8.6120.30
Architecture codenameChagall PRO (2022)Ice Lake-SP (2021)
Release date8 March 2022 (2 years ago)6 April 2021 (3 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX and Xeon Platinum 8368 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)38
Threads2476
Base clock speed4.1 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed4.5 GHz3.4 GHz
Multiplier41no data
L1 cache768 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache6 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache64 MB57 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm10 nm
Die size4x 81 mm2no data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)95 °C83 °C
Number of transistors16,600 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX and Xeon Platinum 8368 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 configuration12
SocketWRX8FCLGA4189
Power consumption (TDP)280 Watt270 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX and Xeon Platinum 8368. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX++
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSX-+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX and Xeon Platinum 8368 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® SPS

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX and Xeon Platinum 8368 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX and Xeon Platinum 8368. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size2 TiB6 TB
Max memory channelsno data8
Maximum memory bandwidth204.8 GB/sno data
ECC memory support-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX and Xeon Platinum 8368.

PCIe version4.04.0
PCI Express lanes12864

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 Threadripper PRO 5945WX 25.58
Xeon Platinum 8368 58.17
+127%

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 Threadripper PRO 5945WX 40483
Xeon Platinum 8368 92054
+127%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 25.58 58.17
Recency 8 March 2022 6 April 2021
Physical cores 12 38
Threads 24 76
Chip lithography 7 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 280 Watt 270 Watt

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX has an age advantage of 11 months, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

Xeon Platinum 8368, on the other hand, has a 127.4% higher aggregate performance score, 216.7% more physical cores and 216.7% more threads, and 3.7% lower power consumption.

The Xeon Platinum 8368 is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX and Xeon Platinum 8368, 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 Threadripper PRO 5945WX
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX
Intel Xeon Platinum 8368
Xeon Platinum 8368

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.


4.8 13 votes

Rate Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 98 votes

Rate Xeon Platinum 8368 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX or Xeon Platinum 8368, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.