Ryzen Threadripper 2950X vs Xeon 696X
Aggregate performance score
Xeon 696X outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 2950X by a whopping 283% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 25 | 464 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 8.98 | 6.01 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | AMD Ryzen Threadripper |
| Power efficiency | 7.78 | 3.95 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | Intel | GlobalFoundries |
| Architecture codename | Granite Rapids (2024−2026) | ZEN+ (2018−2019) |
| Release date | 2 February 2026 (recently) | 13 August 2018 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $5,599 | $899 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon 696X has 49% better value for money than Ryzen Threadripper 2950X.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Xeon 696X and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X 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 | 64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Performance-cores | 64 | no data |
| Threads | 128 | 32 |
| Base clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.8 GHz | 4.4 GHz |
| Bus rate | 0 GT/s | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 35 |
| L1 cache | 112 KB (per core) | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 2 MB (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 336 MB (shared) | 32 MB |
| Chip lithography | Intel 3 nm | 12 nm |
| Die size | 2x 598 mm2 | 213 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 80 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 19,200 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon 696X and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X 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 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FCLGA4710 | Socket TR4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 180 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon 696X and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Speed Shift | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| TSX | + | - |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | + | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
| Deep Learning Boost | + | - |
Security technologies
Xeon 696X and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
| SGX | - | no data |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon 696X and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X 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 Xeon 696X and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5(6400MT/s)MRDIMM(8000MT/s) | DDR4 Quad-channel |
| Maximum memory size | 4 TB | 2 TiB |
| Max memory channels | 8 | 4 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 93.867 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | + | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon 696X and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 128 | no data |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 64.44 | 16.83 |
| Recency | 2 February 2026 | 13 August 2018 |
| Physical cores | 64 | 16 |
| Threads | 128 | 32 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 180 Watt |
Xeon 696X has a 282.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads.
Ryzen Threadripper 2950X, on the other hand, has 94.4% lower power consumption.
The Intel Xeon 696X is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X in performance tests.
Be aware that Xeon 696X is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen Threadripper 2950X is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
