AMD EPYC 7352 vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5955WX Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7352 and AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5955WX are both high-end AMD processors aimed at server and workstation workloads, yet they take fundamentally different approaches. The EPYC 7352 is a 24-core Zen 2 server part with a 155 W TDP, while the Threadripper PRO 5955WX is a 16-core Zen 3 workstation chip with a 280 W TDP. Despite the EPYC’s higher core count, the Threadripper wins 15 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, and the two sit nearly identically in average benchmark score: the EPYC averages 68118, the Threadripper 67868, a 0.4% difference. The data shows that raw core count alone does not decide these results; clock speed, architecture, and cache layout all play decisive roles.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Threadripper PRO 5955WX dominates the Cinebench suite, taking an 18% lead in every single test. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 41837 against the EPYC’s 34314; in R23 single-core, it scores 5906 versus 4844. The same 18% margin appears in R15 and R20, both multi-core and single-core. This consistency suggests a broad architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

PassMark results follow a similar pattern, though with varying margins. The Threadripper wins multithread by 18% (49220 vs 40370), integer math by 19.7% (185168 vs 148605), and floating-point math by 15.7% (104377 vs 87969). It also leads in extended instructions (46952 vs 40203, a 14.4% gap) and physics (2913 vs 2688, a 7.7% gap). Data compression goes to the Threadripper by a smaller 4.4% (690994 vs 660712), and random string sorting is nearly a tie, with the Threadripper ahead by just 0.9% (69879 vs 69231). The largest single-thread gap appears in PassMark single-thread, where the Threadripper leads by 40.5% (3324 vs 1979).

The EPYC 7352 claims two wins. In data encryption, it scores 44426 against the Threadripper’s 42524, a 4.5% lead. In find prime numbers, it scores 301 versus 248, a 21.4% advantage. These are narrow but consistent wins in specific computational patterns. The EPYC’s higher core count (24 vs 16) and larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 64 MB) likely contribute to these results, even though the Threadripper’s higher clocks (4.50 GHz boost vs 3.20 GHz) and newer Zen 3 architecture overcome the core deficit in most other tests.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share a 7 nm TSMC process and both use DDR4 memory with an eight-channel bus and 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, but their internal designs diverge sharply. The EPYC 7352 is built on Zen 2 (codename Rome) and uses four 74 mm² dies, while the Threadripper PRO 5955WX is Zen 3 (codename Chagall PRO) with four 81 mm² dies. The EPYC has 24 cores and 48 threads, with a base clock of 2.30 GHz and a boost of 3.20 GHz. The Threadripper has 16 cores and 32 threads, but runs at a base of 4.00 GHz and boosts to 4.50 GHz. The TDP reflects this: 155 W for the EPYC, 280 W for the Threadripper.

Cache layouts also differ. The EPYC provides 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of L3 per die, for a total of 128 MB. The Threadripper has 64 KB of L1 per core, the same 512 KB of L2 per core, and a single 64 MB L3 pool. The EPYC’s larger total L3 is offset by the Threadripper’s higher per-core L1 and the fact that Zen 3’s unified L3 design is more efficient for many workloads. Both processors support ECC memory and offer Gen 4 PCIe with 128 lanes, and neither has integrated graphics.

The release dates are far apart: the EPYC launched on 2019-08-06, while the Threadripper arrived on 2022-03-07. The EPYC has a launch MSRP of $1350; the Threadripper has no listed launch MSRP. Both are active production parts and have locked multipliers.

The Verdict

The data points to the Threadripper PRO 5955WX as the stronger performer for the majority of workloads. It wins 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, including all Cinebench multi-core and single-core runs, and it leads by double digits in most PassMark categories. The 18% multi-core margin in Cinebench is particularly telling: despite having 8 fewer cores, the Threadripper’s higher clocks and Zen 3 architecture deliver more throughput. For users who prioritize rendering, compilation, or any general-purpose multi-threaded task, the Threadripper is the clear choice.

The EPYC 7352 is not without merit. It wins in data encryption (4.5% lead) and find prime numbers (21.4% lead), and its 24 cores and 128 MB of L3 cache make it attractive for workloads that scale with core count and cache capacity. However, the benchmark results show that even in multi-threaded tests, the Threadripper often wins, so the EPYC’s core advantage is not enough to overcome the Threadripper’s per-core performance. The EPYC’s lower TDP (155 W vs 280 W) may be a consideration for dense server deployments, but that is a specification, not a performance metric.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more cores?

A: The EPYC 7352 has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the Threadripper PRO 5955WX has 16 cores and 32 threads.

Q: Which CPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Threadripper PRO 5955WX boosts to 4.50 GHz, whereas the EPYC 7352 boosts to 3.20 GHz.

Q: Which CPU wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Threadripper PRO 5955WX scores 41837, beating the EPYC’s 34314 by 18%.

Q: Which CPU wins in PassMark data encryption?

A: The EPYC 7352 scores 44426, ahead of the Threadripper’s 42524, a 4.5% lead.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the EPYC 7352?

A: The EPYC 7352 has a launch MSRP of $1350; the Threadripper PRO 5955WX has no listed launch MSRP.

Q: Which CPU has more total L3 cache?

A: The EPYC 7352 has 128 MB total L3, while the Threadripper PRO 5955WX has 64 MB.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 7352 wins in two specific workloads: data encryption (4.5% lead) and find prime numbers (21.4% lead). These are computationally intensive tasks that benefit from the EPYC’s larger L3 cache and higher core count. For cryptographic operations, key generation, or prime-number searches, the EPYC is the better choice.

The Threadripper PRO 5955WX wins everywhere else. It leads in all Cinebench tests (18% margin), PassMark multithread (18%), integer math (19.7%), floating-point math (15.7%), extended instructions (14.4%), physics (7.7%), data compression (4.4%), and single-thread (40.5%). For rendering, simulation, code compilation, and any general-purpose compute, the Threadripper is the superior part.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 7352 | AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5955WX |

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

| Cores | 24 | 16 |

| Threads | 48 | 32 |

| Base Clock | 2.30 GHz | 4.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.20 GHz | 4.50 GHz |

| TDP | 155 W | 280 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | AMD Socket WRX8 |

| Architecture | Zen 2 | Zen 3 |

| Codename | Rome | Chagall PRO |

| Generation | EPYC (Zen 2 (Rome)) | Ryzen Threadripper (Zen 3 (Chagall)) |

| Die Size | 4x 74 mm² | 4x 81 mm² |

| L1 Cache (per core) | 96 KB | 64 KB |

| L3 Cache | 32 MB per die (total 128 MB) | 64 MB (total) |

| Release Date | 2019-08-06 | 2022-03-07 |

| Launch MSRP | $1350 | None |

| Part Number | 100-000000077 | 100-000000447 |

Both processors share the same 7 nm process, TSMC foundry, DDR4 memory support, eight-channel bus, 204.8 GB/s bandwidth, ECC support, Gen 4 PCIe with 128 lanes, and no integrated graphics. They also both have 512 KB of L2 per core, a 155 W TDP for the EPYC versus 280 W for the Threadripper, and neither is multiplier-unlocked. The specification table above highlights only the differences that matter for performance and platform selection.