AMD EPYC 7443P vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7443P and AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX are both server and workstation processors from AMD, but they target different generations and design philosophies. The EPYC 7443P is a 24-core, 48-thread Milan part from the EPYC 7003 series, built on the Zen 3 architecture and a 7 nm process. The Threadripper PRO 9945WX is a 12-core, 24-thread processor from the 9000 series, using the newer Zen 5 architecture and a 4 nm process, with a much higher clock speed. The database records 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons between these two, with the EPYC 7443P winning 13 of them and the Threadripper PRO 9945WX winning 4. This split suggests that the older, higher-core-count EPYC part holds a broad advantage in most measured workloads, while the newer Threadripper excels in specific areas tied to its architectural improvements and clock speed.

The EPYC 7443P has a base clock of 2.85 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz, while the Threadripper PRO 9945WX operates at a 4.70 GHz base and a 5.40 GHz boost. This clock difference is substantial, yet the EPYC still wins in the majority of tests, largely because it has double the cores and threads. The EPYC also has a larger L3 cache at 128 MB shared, compared to 64 MB on the Threadripper, and it uses DDR4 memory with eight-channel support and a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. The Threadripper uses DDR5, also with eight-channel support, but doubles the bandwidth to 409.6 GB/s. Both support ECC memory, and both offer 128 PCIe lanes, but the EPYC provides Gen 4 lanes while the Threadripper provides Gen 5 lanes.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear choice for most workloads: the AMD EPYC 7443P. It wins 13 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, including all three Cinebench multi-core tests and all three Cinebench single-core tests, though by very small margins. Its wins in PassMark integer math, floating point math, data compression, data encryption, prime number finding, and random string sorting are often large, ranging from 13.1% to 56.7% ahead of the Threadripper PRO 9945WX. For users running heavily parallel, multi-threaded tasks, the EPYC 7443P is the stronger performer in this comparison.

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX is the better pick for a narrower set of workloads. It wins in PassMark single-thread performance by 36.4%, in PassMark physics by 22.4%, and in PassMark extended instructions by 11.4%. It also has a higher average benchmark score relative to its nearest rivals, but its overall average score of 76513 is lower than the EPYC 7443P’s average of 81661. The Threadripper is the choice for tasks that favor single-core speed or specific instruction set extensions, such as certain physics simulations or legacy single-threaded applications. However, given the EPYC’s dominance in the majority of tests, including the multi-core Cinebench results, the EPYC 7443P is the more versatile option based on recorded data.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 7443P wins across a broad range of compute-intensive workloads. In Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests, it leads by 0.2% in each case, with scores of 4881 versus 4871, 20341 versus 20296, and 48433 versus 48325 respectively. Its largest margins come in PassMark data encryption, where it scores 57263 against 36540, a 56.7% lead, and PassMark integer math, where it scores 232632 against 185421, a 25.5% lead. It also wins PassMark data compression by 22.2%, PassMark find prime numbers by 22.4%, PassMark floating point math by 16.5%, and PassMark random string sorting by 13.1%. These results indicate strength in encryption, compression, arithmetic, and general data processing.

The Threadripper PRO 9945WX wins in PassMark single-thread performance, scoring 4573 against 2907, a 36.4% advantage. It also wins PassMark physics, scoring 6118 against 4748, a 22.4% lead, and PassMark extended instructions, scoring 54406 against 48213, an 11.4% lead. These wins are concentrated in areas that depend heavily on per-core performance or specialized instruction execution. For workloads that are not highly parallel and rely on a single thread, or for physics calculations that scale with clock speed, the Threadripper is the better performer.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations. The EPYC 7443P uses Zen 3, codenamed Milan, and is part of the EPYC 7003 series. It is built on a 7 nm process at TSMC, with a transistor count of 16,600 million and a die size of 4x 81 mm². The Threadripper PRO 9945WX uses Zen 5, codenamed Shimada Peak, and is part of the Ryzen Threadripper 9000 series. It is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a transistor count of 16,630 million and a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². The smaller process node and smaller die size on the Threadripper indicate a more modern manufacturing technology.

Cores and threads differ significantly. The EPYC 7443P has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the Threadripper PRO 9945WX has 12 cores and 24 threads. This is the primary reason for the EPYC’s multi-core wins, despite its older architecture and lower clock speeds. The L1 cache is identical at 64 KB per core, but the L2 cache differs: the EPYC has 512 KB per core, while the Threadripper has 1 MB per core. The L3 cache also differs, with the EPYC offering 128 MB shared and the Threadripper offering 64 MB. The Threadripper’s larger L2 cache per core and smaller L3 total reflect its lower core count and newer design.

Memory support is another major difference. The EPYC 7443P supports DDR4 memory with eight-channel architecture and a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. The Threadripper PRO 9945WX supports DDR5 memory, also with eight-channel architecture, but with a bandwidth of 409.6 GB/s, double that of the EPYC. Both support ECC memory. PCIe support also differs: the EPYC provides Gen 4 with 128 lanes, while the Threadripper provides Gen 5 with 128 lanes. The Threadripper has an unlocked multiplier, while the EPYC does not. The EPYC was released on March 14, 2021, while the Threadripper was released on June 30, 2025, making the Threadripper a much newer product.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 7443P has 24 cores and 48 threads. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX has 12 cores and 24 threads.

Q: Which processor has higher clock speeds?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX has a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The AMD EPYC 7443P has a base clock of 2.85 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz.

Q: Which processor wins in single-thread performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX wins in PassMark single-thread performance, scoring 4573 against the EPYC 7443P’s 2907, a 36.4% advantage.

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core Cinebench tests?

A: The AMD EPYC 7443P wins in all three Cinebench multi-core tests, but by a narrow margin. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 48433 against 48325, a 0.2% lead.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences?

A: The AMD EPYC 7443P supports DDR4 with a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX supports DDR5 with a bandwidth of 409.6 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD EPYC 7443P has 128 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX has 64 MB of L3 cache.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive wins for the EPYC 7443P come in PassMark tests. In data encryption, the EPYC scores 57263 against 36540, a 56.7% lead. This is the largest margin in the entire comparison. In integer math, the EPYC scores 232632 against 185421, a 25.5% lead. In find prime numbers, the EPYC scores 410 against 335, a 22.4% lead. In data compression, the EPYC scores 820859 against 671963, a 22.2% lead. In floating point math, the EPYC scores 129932 against 111566, a 16.5% lead. In random string sorting, the EPYC scores 95581 against 84498, a 13.1% lead. These results show a consistent pattern of the EPYC outperforming the Threadripper in math and data processing workloads.

The Threadripper PRO 9945WX wins in PassMark single-thread performance, scoring 4573 against 2907, a 36.4% lead. This is its largest margin. It also wins PassMark physics, scoring 6118 against 4748, a 22.4% lead, and PassMark extended instructions, scoring 54406 against 48213, an 11.4% lead. In the Cinebench tests, the EPYC wins all six, but by extremely narrow margins. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC scores 4881 against 4871, a 0.2% lead. In R15 single-core, the EPYC scores 689 against 687, a 0.3% lead. In R20 multi-core, the EPYC scores 20341 against 20296, a 0.2% lead. In R20 single-core, the EPYC scores 2871 against 2865, a 0.2% lead. In R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 48433 against 48325, a 0.2% lead. In R23 single-core, the EPYC scores 6837 against 6822, a 0.2% lead. The PassMark multithread test is also close, with the EPYC scoring 56981 against 56854, a 0.2% lead.

The overall average benchmark score reinforces the EPYC’s position. The EPYC 7443P has an average score of 81661, while the Threadripper PRO 9945WX has an average of 76513. The EPYC also ranks in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, while the Threadripper ranks in the 95th percentile. The nearest rival to the EPYC is the Intel Core i9-14900KS with an average score of 81127, a 0.7% difference, while the Threadripper’s nearest rival is the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P with an average score of 76492, a 0% difference.

Specification Differences

The AMD EPYC 7443P and AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX differ in almost every major specification. The EPYC has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the Threadripper has 12 cores and 24 threads. The base clock is 2.85 GHz on the EPYC and 4.70 GHz on the Threadripper. The boost clock is 4.00 GHz on the EPYC and 5.40 GHz on the Threadripper. The TDP is 200 watts on the EPYC and 350 watts on the Threadripper. The socket is AMD Socket SP3 for the EPYC and AMD Socket sTR5 for the Threadripper.

The architecture is Zen 3 for the EPYC, codenamed Milan, and Zen 5 for the Threadripper, codenamed Shimada Peak. The process node is 7 nm for the EPYC and 4 nm for the Threadripper, both from TSMC. The transistor count is 16,600 million for the EPYC and 16,630 million for the Threadripper, nearly identical. The die size is 4x 81 mm² for the EPYC and 2x 70.6 mm² for the Threadripper. The L1 cache is 64 KB per core for both. The L2 cache is 512 KB per core for the EPYC and 1 MB per core for the Threadripper. The L3 cache is 128 MB shared for the EPYC and 64 MB for the Threadripper.

Memory support is DDR4 for the EPYC and DDR5 for the Threadripper. Both have an eight-channel memory bus, but the bandwidth is 204.8 GB/s for the EPYC and 409.6 GB/s for the Threadripper. Both support ECC memory. PCIe support is Gen 4 with 128 lanes for the EPYC and Gen 5 with 128 lanes for the Threadripper. The EPYC does not have integrated graphics, and the Threadripper has integrated graphics listed as N/A. The EPYC has a fixed multiplier, while the Threadripper has an unlocked multiplier. The release date is March 14, 2021 for the EPYC and June 30, 2025 for the Threadripper. The EPYC has a launch MSRP of $1337, while the Threadripper has no recorded launch MSRP.