i3-550 vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX outperforms Core i3-550 by a whopping 5858% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX and Core i3-550 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 16 | 2446 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 11.33 | 0.06 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 16.29 | 1.31 |
| Architecture codename | Storm Peak (2023) | Clarkdale (2010−2011) |
| Release date | 19 October 2023 (1 year ago) | 30 May 2010 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $3,899 | $101 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX has 18783% better value for money than i3-550.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX and Core i3-550 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 64 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 4 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.3 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 2.5 GT/s |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 256 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 128 MB (shared) | 4 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 4x 71 mm2 | 81 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 73 °C |
| Number of transistors | 26,280 million | 382 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX and Core i3-550 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 | sTR5 | FCLGA1156 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 73 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX and Core i3-550. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.2 |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| PAE | no data | 36 Bit |
| FDI | no data | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Security technologies
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX and Core i3-550 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX and Core i3-550 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX and Core i3-550. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 16.38 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 21 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | Intel® HD Graphics for Previous Generation Intel® Processors |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX and Core i3-550 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 2 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX and Core i3-550.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 128 | 16 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 61.37 | 1.03 |
| Recency | 19 October 2023 | 30 May 2010 |
| Physical cores | 32 | 2 |
| Threads | 64 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 73 Watt |
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX has a 5858.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, 1500% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and a 540% more advanced lithography process.
i3-550, on the other hand, has 379.5% lower power consumption.
The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i3-550 in performance tests.
Be aware that Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX is a server/workstation processor while Core i3-550 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7975WX and Core i3-550, 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.
