Ryzen Threadripper 1950X vs Xeon Platinum 8168
Aggregate performance score
Xeon Platinum 8168 outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 1950X by a moderate 18% 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 | 378 | 490 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.88 | 3.76 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Xeon Platinum | AMD Ryzen Threadripper |
| Power efficiency | 3.80 | 3.68 |
| Designer | Intel | AMD |
| Manufacturer | no data | GlobalFoundries |
| Architecture codename | Skylake (server) (2017−2018) | Zen (2017−2020) |
| Release date | 25 April 2017 (8 years ago) | 10 August 2017 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $5,890 | $999 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X has 327% better value for money than Xeon Platinum 8168.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Xeon Platinum 8168 and Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 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 | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 48 | 32 |
| Base clock speed | 2.7 GHz | 3.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 4 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | 27 | 34 |
| L1 cache | 1.5 MB | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 24 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 33 MB | 32 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | no data | 213 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 85 °C | 68 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 9,600 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Xeon Platinum 8168 and Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 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 | 8 (Multiprocessor) | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FCLGA3647 | SP3r2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 205 Watt | 180 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Platinum 8168 and Ryzen Threadripper 1950X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 | SSE4.2, SSE4A, AMD-V, AES, AVX2, FMA3, SHA |
| 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 |
Security technologies
Xeon Platinum 8168 and Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 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 Xeon Platinum 8168 and Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 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 Platinum 8168 and Ryzen Threadripper 1950X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-2666 | DDR4 Quad-channel |
| Maximum memory size | 768 GB | 2 TiB |
| Max memory channels | 6 | 4 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 128.001 GB/s | 85.33 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | + | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Platinum 8168 and Ryzen Threadripper 1950X.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 48 | 60 |
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.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 18.36 | 15.60 |
| Recency | 25 April 2017 | 10 August 2017 |
| Physical cores | 24 | 16 |
| Threads | 48 | 32 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 205 Watt | 180 Watt |
Xeon Platinum 8168 has a 17.7% higher aggregate performance score, and 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads.
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 months, and 13.9% lower power consumption.
The Intel Xeon Platinum 8168 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X in performance tests.
Be aware that Xeon Platinum 8168 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 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.
