AMD EPYC 4564P vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX Comparison

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX and the AMD EPYC 4564P occupy adjacent positions in the benchmark database, with the Threadripper holding a 2.3% average score advantage (98504 vs 96263). While both processors target server and workstation markets and sit at the 98th percentile of all CPUs, they represent fundamentally different design philosophies: the Threadripper leverages 24 Zen 3 cores with massive memory bandwidth, while the EPYC counters with 16 faster Zen 4 cores and a much higher boost clock. The benchmark data shows a decisive but nuanced split, with the Threadripper winning 14 of 17 head-to-head tests, yet the EPYC taking the single-thread crown by a substantial 23.7%.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the AMD EPYC 4564P has 16 cores and 32 threads. The Threadripper’s 50% core advantage is the primary driver of its multi-threaded benchmark wins.

Q: How do their single-thread performance scores compare?

A: The EPYC 4564P wins decisively in single-thread tests, scoring 4371 in PassMark single-thread versus 3337 for the Threadripper — a 23.7% difference. This reflects the EPYC’s higher base clock of 4.50 GHz and boost clock of 5.70 GHz, compared to 3.80 GHz and 4.50 GHz respectively.

Q: What are the architectural generations and process nodes?

A: The Threadripper PRO 5965WX uses Zen 3 architecture (codenamed Chagall PRO) on TSMC’s 7 nm process, while the EPYC 4564P uses Zen 4 architecture (codenamed Raphael) on TSMC’s 5 nm process. The EPYC’s newer node contributes to its higher clock speeds.

Q: Which processor supports faster memory types and more bandwidth?

A: The Threadripper PRO 5965WX supports DDR4 memory with an eight-channel bus delivering 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. The EPYC 4564P supports DDR5 but with a dual-channel bus, yielding 83.2 GB/s. The Threadripper’s bandwidth is 146% higher, a critical factor in memory-intensive workloads.

Q: How do their PCIe capabilities differ?

A: The Threadripper PRO 5965WX offers PCIe Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only), while the EPYC 4564P provides PCIe Gen 5 with 28 lanes (CPU only). The Threadripper provides far more expansion capacity, though the EPYC’s PCIe Gen 5 standard offers higher per-lane bandwidth.

Q: What is the release date and launch MSRP for each?

A: The Threadripper PRO 5965WX launched on 2022-03-07 with a launch MSRP of $2399. The EPYC 4564P launched on 2024-05-20 with a launch MSRP of $699.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX is the clear winner in multi-threaded compute workloads. Its 24 cores and 48 threads dominate in Cinebench R23 multicore, scoring 56400 versus the EPYC’s 55592 — a 1.5% edge. More dramatically, the Threadripper excels in PassMark’s integer math (281247 vs 230740, a 21.9% lead), data encryption (63113 vs 51282, 23.1% ahead), and prime number finding (523 vs 373, a massive 40.2% advantage). The data also shows a 16.2% lead in data compression (1010067 vs 869555), making the Threadripper better suited for rendering, scientific computing, and database workloads that scale with core count and memory bandwidth.

The AMD EPYC 4564P wins where single-thread speed and frequency matter most. Its PassMark single-thread score of 4371 crushes the Threadripper’s 3337, a 23.7% gap that makes it the better choice for lightly-threaded applications, real-time processing, and workloads with strict latency requirements. The EPYC also takes PassMark random string sorting (104284 vs 99287, 4.8% ahead), indicating a slight edge in sorting algorithms that benefit from the newer Zen 4 core design. Its 5.70 GHz boost clock, compared to 4.50 GHz, gives it a clear advantage in frequency-sensitive tasks.

The head-to-head results show a 14-3 split in favor of the Threadripper, but the EPYC’s single-thread victory is substantial enough to matter for specific use cases. For workstations running interactive design tools or programming compilers with poor parallelization, the EPYC’s speed per core is compelling. For batch rendering, video encoding, or large-scale data analysis, the Threadripper’s core count and bandwidth win consistently.

Architecture Differences

The Threadripper PRO 5965WX is built on Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Chagall PRO, fabricated on TSMC’s 7 nm process. It uses a chiplet design with four dies, each measuring 81 mm², totaling 16,600 million transistors. The EPYC 4564P uses the newer Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Raphael, on TSMC’s 5 nm process, with two dies of 71 mm² each and 13,140 million transistors. The node shrink enables the EPYC’s higher clock speeds but with fewer transistors overall.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core, but the Threadripper’s L2 cache is 512 KB per core, while the EPYC’s is 1 MB per core — double the capacity. The L3 cache is where the Threadripper pulls ahead: 128 MB total versus 64 MB shared on the EPYC. This larger aggregate cache benefits the Threadripper in data-heavy workloads, though the EPYC’s per-core L2 advantage helps with single-thread efficiency.

Memory architecture is a major divergence. The Threadripper uses eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the EPYC uses dual-channel DDR5 with 83.2 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. The Threadripper’s bandwidth is a defining feature for server workloads, while the EPYC’s DDR5 support offers newer memory technology but at lower total throughput.

PCIe capabilities also differ: the Threadripper provides 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, while the EPYC provides 28 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. The Threadripper’s lane count is ideal for multi-GPU configurations or extensive NVMe storage, whereas the EPYC’s Gen 5 standard supports faster individual devices but far fewer of them. The EPYC also includes integrated Radeon Graphics, which the Threadripper lacks.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX | AMD EPYC 4564P |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 24 | 16 |

| Threads | 48 | 32 |

| Base Clock | 3.80 GHz | 4.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.50 GHz | 5.70 GHz |

| TDP | 280 W | 170 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket WRX8 | AMD Socket AM5 |

| Architecture | Zen 3 | Zen 4 |

| Codename | Chagall PRO | Raphael |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 16,600 million | 13,140 million |

| Die Size | 4x 81 mm² | 2x 71 mm² |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 128 MB | 64 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Eight-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | 83.2 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 128 Lanes | Gen 5, 28 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Radeon Graphics |

| Release Date | 2022-03-07 | 2024-05-20 |

| Launch MSRP | $2399 | $699 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Threadripper PRO 5965WX wins every Cinebench test, though by narrow margins. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 56400 versus 55592 for the EPYC, a 1.5% lead. The single-core R23 result is similarly tight: 7962 vs 7848, also 1.5%. These margins suggest that in pure rendering workloads, the Threadripper’s 24 cores barely outpace the EPYC’s 16 cores, thanks to the latter’s much higher clock speeds.

PassMark tests reveal where the Threadripper’s advantages become pronounced. Data encryption shows a 23.1% gap (63113 vs 51282), while integer math is 21.9% ahead (281247 vs 230740). The most extreme difference is in prime number finding, where the Threadripper scores 523 against 373 — a 40.2% advantage that highlights its superior multi-threading efficiency. Floating-point math also favors the Threadripper by 10.8% (157708 vs 142391), and physics simulation shows a 19.6% lead (4251 vs 3554).

The EPYC 4564P’s wins are concentrated in two areas. PassMark single-thread is decisive: 4371 vs 3337, a 23.7% victory that underscores its frequency advantage. Random string sorting goes to the EPYC by 4.8% (104284 vs 99287), a smaller but notable win. In the aggregate, the Threadripper’s average benchmark score is 98504 versus 96263 for the EPYC, a 2.3% difference that matches the deltaPct shown in the rivals data.

The benchmark data indicates that the Threadripper PRO 5965WX is the stronger all-around performer, winning 14 of 17 tests. However, the EPYC 4564P’s single-thread dominance is not trivial — a 23.7% gap is one of the largest margins in any comparison. Neither processor is unlocked for overclocking, so these results represent out-of-box performance. The Threadripper’s higher TDP (280 W vs 170 W) reflects its additional cores and memory channels, while the EPYC’s lower power draw makes it a more efficient choice for single-socket servers where raw frequency matters more than core count.