AMD EPYC 4565P vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX Comparison

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX and the AMD EPYC 4565P represent two distinct approaches to high-core-count computing, separated by process generation and platform philosophy. The Threadripper PRO is a 24-core Zen 3 part built for the WRX8 workstation platform, while the EPYC 4565P is a 16-core Zen 5 processor on the AM5 socket. Despite the EPYC’s newer architecture and higher clocks, the benchmark data shows the older, wider Threadripper PRO winning 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, though the EPYC claims a decisive victory in single-threaded workloads.

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 4565P has 16 cores and 32 threads.

Q: How does the EPYC 4565P achieve higher clock speeds?

A: The EPYC 4565P has a base clock of 4.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.70 GHz, compared to the Threadripper PRO’s 3.80 GHz base and 4.50 GHz boost. This is despite the EPYC having a lower TDP of 170 watts versus 280 watts.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The Threadripper PRO 5965WX uses eight-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, while the EPYC 4565P uses dual-channel DDR5 with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s.

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics?

A: The AMD EPYC 4565P includes Radeon Graphics, while the Threadripper PRO 5965WX has no integrated graphics.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Threadripper PRO 5965WX has an average benchmark score of 98504, placing it in the 97th percentile, while the EPYC 4565P scores 95764, placing it in the 96th percentile.

Q: In what test does the EPYC 4565P outperform the Threadripper PRO?

A: The EPYC 4565P wins the PassMark single-thread test with a score of 4712 versus 3337, a 29.2% advantage. It also wins the duplicate PassMark singlethread test by the same margin.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different silicon. The Threadripper PRO 5965WX uses the Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Chagall PRO, manufactured on TSMC’s 7 nm process. The EPYC 4565P uses the newer Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Grado, on a 4 nm process. This process shrink allows the EPYC to pack a similar transistor count — 16,630 million versus 16,600 million — into a smaller die footprint of 2x 70.6 mm² compared to the Threadripper’s 4x 81 mm².

Cache layouts also diverge significantly. The Threadripper PRO allocates 64 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, with a large 128 MB L3 cache. The EPYC 4565P has 80 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, but only 64 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core L2 on the EPYC helps feed its higher clock speeds, while the Threadripper’s doubled L3 capacity benefits multi-threaded workloads that reuse large data sets.

Memory architecture is a major differentiator. The Threadripper PRO supports DDR4 over an eight-channel bus, yielding 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The EPYC 4565P moves to DDR5 but only over a dual-channel bus, capping bandwidth at 89.6 GB/s. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Threadripper PRO offers Gen 4 with 128 lanes, while the EPYC 4565P provides Gen 5 with 24 lanes. Both support ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers.

The release dates reflect the generational gap. The Threadripper PRO launched on 2022-03-07 with a launch MSRP of $2399. The EPYC 4565P launched on 2025-05-12 with a launch MSRP of $589. Both remain in active production.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for multi-threaded dominance. The Threadripper PRO 5965WX wins every Cinebench test and every PassMark multi-threaded test in the head-to-head comparison. Its 24 cores provide a raw throughput advantage that the EPYC’s higher clocks cannot overcome in heavily threaded scenarios. The Threadripper PRO is the choice for workloads that scale across cores, such as rendering, simulation, and data compression, where it leads by margins ranging from 3.7% to 77.9%.

The EPYC 4565P is the single-thread specialist. Its 5.70 GHz boost clock versus the Threadripper’s 4.50 GHz yields a 29.2% advantage in PassMark single-thread performance. For applications that rely on per-core speed — legacy software, certain database operations, or lightly threaded code — the EPYC 4565P is clearly superior. Its dual-channel DDR5 memory and 170-watt TDP also make it a more efficient and compact platform option.

The platform context matters. The Threadripper PRO requires the WRX8 socket with 128 lanes of Gen 4 PCIe, suited for expansion-heavy workstations. The EPYC 4565P uses the mainstream AM5 socket with 24 Gen 5 lanes, which is more modest but also more accessible. The EPYC includes integrated Radeon Graphics, eliminating the need for a discrete GPU in basic configurations. The Threadripper PRO has no integrated graphics.

For buyers prioritizing maximum multi-core throughput and massive memory bandwidth, the Threadripper PRO 5965WX is the data-supported winner. For those needing the fastest possible single-thread performance and a newer, more efficient platform with integrated graphics, the EPYC 4565P is the superior choice.

Specification Differences

• Cores: 24 (Threadripper PRO) vs 16 (EPYC 4565P)
• Threads: 48 vs 32
• Base clock: 3.80 GHz vs 4.30 GHz
• Boost clock: 4.50 GHz vs 5.70 GHz
• TDP: 280 W vs 170 W
• Socket: AMD Socket WRX8 vs AMD Socket AM5
• Architecture: Zen 3 vs Zen 5
• Process node: 7 nm vs 4 nm
• Transistors: 16,600 million vs 16,630 million
• Die size: 4x 81 mm² vs 2x 70.6 mm²
• L1 cache: 64 KB (per core) vs 80 KB (per core)
• L2 cache: 512 KB (per core) vs 1 MB (per core)
• L3 cache: 128 MB vs 64 MB (shared)
• Memory support: DDR4 vs DDR5
• Memory bus: Eight-channel vs Dual-channel
• Memory bandwidth: 204.8 GB/s vs 89.6 GB/s
• PCIe: Gen 4, 128 Lanes vs Gen 5, 24 Lanes
• Integrated graphics: None vs Radeon Graphics
• Release date: 2022-03-07 vs 2025-05-12
• Launch MSRP: $2399 vs $589

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Threadripper PRO 5965WX dominates the multi-core landscape. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 56400 against the EPYC’s 54405, a 3.7% lead. The same 3.7% delta appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core (23688 vs 22850) and R15 multi-core (5685 vs 5484). The single-core Cinebench results are also close, with the Threadripper PRO winning R23 single-core 7962 to 7680 and R20 single-core 3344 to 3225, both by 3.7%.

The PassMark suite reveals where the core count matters most. In data compression, the Threadripper PRO scores 1010067 versus 860786, a 17.3% advantage. Integer math shows a 12.2% lead (281247 vs 250683), while random string sorting is 22.1% higher (99287 vs 81318). The most extreme gap is in find prime numbers, where the Threadripper PRO scores 523 against the EPYC’s 294 — a 77.9% difference. Physics tests also favor the Threadripper PRO by 42.8% (4251 vs 2976).

Data encryption is another major win for the Threadripper PRO. It scores 63113 versus 48268, a 30.8% margin. Floating point math is closer, with the Threadripper PRO leading 157708 to 152003 (3.8%). Extended instructions show a 4.6% lead (67300 vs 64345), and multi-threaded performance is 4.5% higher (66353 vs 63474).

The EPYC 4565P’s only victories come in single-thread performance. It scores 4712 in PassMark single-thread versus the Threadripper PRO’s 3337, a 29.2% advantage. The identical result appears in the PassMark singlethread test, also 4712 vs 3337. These wins are substantial, but they represent just 2 of the 17 benchmarks. The Threadripper PRO’s 15 wins, including all six Cinebench tests and all but two PassMark tests, confirm its status as the multi-threaded champion in this comparison.