E-450 vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and E-450 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | 10 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.77 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | AMD E-Series |
| Architecture codename | Storm Peak | Zacate (2011−2013) |
| Release date | 19 October 2023 (less than a year ago) | 22 August 2011 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $9,999 | no data |
| Current price | $11150 (1.1x MSRP) | $125 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and E-450 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 | 96 | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 192 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.5 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 5.1 GHz | 1.65 GHz |
| L1 cache | 6 MB | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 96 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 384 MB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 40 nm |
| Die size | Compute Die (CCD) Size 71 mm2, I/O Die (IOD) Size 388 mm2 mm2 | 75 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 78,840 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | No |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and E-450 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 | FT1 BGA 413-Ball |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 18 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and E-450. 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, AVX-512, BMI1, BMI2, SHA, F16C, FMA3, AMD64, EVP, AMD-V, SMAP, SMEP, SMT, Precision Boost 2 | MMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V |
| AES-NI | + | no data |
| AVX | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and E-450 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and E-450. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR3 Single-channel |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | AMD Radeon HD 6320 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and E-450.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms E-450 by 20119% in Passmark.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
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%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms E-450 by 648% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
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%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms E-450 by 3467% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
3DMark06 CPU
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%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms E-450 by 1966% in 3DMark06 CPU.
wPrime 32
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%
E-450 outperforms Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX by 713% in wPrime 32.
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core
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%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms E-450 by 12297% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core
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%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms E-450 by 963% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.
TrueCrypt AES
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%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms E-450 by 42567% in TrueCrypt AES.
WinRAR 4.0
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: 13%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms E-450 by 12791% in WinRAR 4.0.
x264 encoding pass 1
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: 13%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms E-450 by 2092% in x264 encoding pass 1.
x264 encoding pass 2
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: 13%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms E-450 by 9156% in x264 encoding pass 2.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 19 October 2023 | 22 August 2011 |
| Physical cores | 96 | 2 |
| Threads | 192 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 18 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and E-450. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX is a desktop processor while E-450 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and E-450, 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.
