Xeon E-2276M vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX
Aggregated performance score
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms Xeon E-2276M by 1212% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Xeon E-2276M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1 | 876 |
| Place by popularity | 10 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.77 | 28.24 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Mobile workstation |
| Series | no data | Intel Xeon E |
| Architecture codename | Storm Peak | Coffee Lake-H (2018−2019) |
| Release date | 19 October 2023 (less than a year ago) | 1 May 2019 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $9,999 | $450 |
| Current price | $11150 (1.1x MSRP) | $230 (0.5x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon E-2276M has 919% better value for money than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Xeon E-2276M 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 | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 192 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.1 GHz | 4.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 6 MB | 384 KB |
| L2 cache | 96 MB | 1.5 MB |
| L3 cache | 384 MB | 12 MB |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | Compute Die (CCD) Size 71 mm2, I/O Die (IOD) Size 388 mm2 mm2 | 149.6 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | 100 °C |
| 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 Xeon E-2276M 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 | FCBGA1440 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 45 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Xeon E-2276M. 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 | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| My WiFi | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| TSX | no data | + |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | no data | + |
| Flex Memory Access | no data | + |
| SIPP | no data | + |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Xeon E-2276M technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| MPX | no data | + |
| Identity Protection | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Xeon E-2276M are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Xeon E-2276M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 41.8 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | no data | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | Intel UHD Graphics P630 |
| Max video memory | no data | 64 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 1.2 GHz |
| InTru 3D | no data | + |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Xeon E-2276M integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | no data | + |
| HDMI | no data | + |
| DVI | no data | + |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Xeon E-2276M integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | no data | + |
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 4096x2304@30Hz |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 4096x2304@60Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 4096x2304@60Hz |
| Max resolution over VGA | no data | N/A |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Xeon E-2276M integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.5 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Xeon E-2276M.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 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.
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms Xeon E-2276M by 1212% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
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 Xeon E-2276M by 1212% in Passmark.
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
Benchmark coverage: 15%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms Xeon E-2276M by 1175% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.
Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core
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: 15%
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX outperforms Xeon E-2276M by 47% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 100.00 | 7.62 |
| Recency | 19 October 2023 | 1 May 2019 |
| Physical cores | 96 | 6 |
| Threads | 192 | 12 |
| Cost | $9999 | $450 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 45 Watt |
The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E-2276M in performance tests.
Be aware that Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX is a desktop processor while Xeon E-2276M is a mobile workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX and Xeon E-2276M, 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.
