Opteron 6204 vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 215 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 21.33 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Power efficiency | 3.42 | no data |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |
| Architecture codename | Storm Peak (2023) | Interlagos (2011−2012) |
| Release date | 19 October 2023 (2 years ago) | 14 November 2011 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $1,399 | $455 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX and Opteron 6204: 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 | 12 (Dodeca-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 24 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 4.7 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.3 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 768 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per module) |
| L3 cache | 64 MB (shared) | 8 MB (per die) |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 2x 71 mm2 | 2x 315 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 69 °C |
| Number of transistors | 13,140 million | 2,400 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX and Opteron 6204 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 | 4 |
| Socket | sTR5 | G34 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 115 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX and Opteron 6204. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | + | - |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX and Opteron 6204 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX and Opteron 6204. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX and Opteron 6204.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 136 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 19 October 2023 | 14 November 2011 |
| Physical cores | 12 | 4 |
| Threads | 24 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 115 Watt |
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX has an age advantage of 11 years, 200% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 540% more advanced lithography process.
Opteron 6204, on the other hand, has 204% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX and AMD Opteron 6204. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX is a desktop processor while Opteron 6204 is a server/workstation one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
