CPU Comparison: AMD Ryzen 9 7950X vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

Key Findings

The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X leads in single-threaded performance by up to 8.5%
In multi-threaded workloads, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX shows superior performance with a 29.0% advantage
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX has the highest core count with 24 cores

Performance Rankings & Market Position

AMD Ryzen 9 7950X

Desktop

Release Date

Q3 2022

Market Position

73rd fastest in multithreading

4890 CPUs45th fastest in single threading

4890 CPUs16th fastest in

1398 Desktop CPUs

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

Desktop

Release Date

Q4 2023

Market Position

37th fastest in multithreading

4890 CPUs117th fastest in single threading

4890 CPUs9th fastest in

1398 Desktop CPUs

Performance

Single-Thread Performance

7950X

4,276

7965WX

3,942

Multi-Thread Performance

7950X

62,703

7965WX

80,865

Specifications: AMD Ryzen 9 7950X vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

💻CPU Model

AMD Ryzen 9 7950X

7950X

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX

7965WX

🔄Other Names

AMD Ryzen 9 7950X 16-Core Processor

7950X

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX 24-Cores

7965WX

⚡Base Clock

4.5 GHz

7950X

4.2 GHz

7965WX

🚀Turbo Clock

5.7 GHz

7950X

5.3 GHz

7965WX

💻Cores/Threads

16 Threads: 32

7950X

24 Threads: 48

7965WX

🔌Socket

AM5

7950X

sTR5

7965WX

⚡TDP

170 W

7950X

350 W

7965WX

💾Cache

L1 Instruction Cache: 16 x 32 KBL1 Data Cache: 16 x 32 KBL2 Cache: 16 x 1024 KBL3 Cache: 64 MB

7950X

L1 Instruction Cache: 24 x 32 KBL1 Data Cache: 24 x 32 KBL2 Cache: 24 x 1024 KBL3 Cache: 128 MB

7965WX

The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X and AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX compete in the Desktop segment. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X shows superior single-thread performance, making it better for tasks like gaming and light workloads.

For multi-threaded applications, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX takes the lead, despite having the same core count.

Power consumption differs significantly, with the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7965WX drawing more power under load (350W vs 170W). This may impact system thermal design and power supply requirements.