AMD EPYC 7713P vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX Comparison

The AMD EPYC 7713P and AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX are both 64-core, 128-thread Zen 3 parts aimed at heavy professional workloads, but the benchmark data shows they are not equals in raw performance. The Threadripper PRO 5995WX wins every single head-to-head test, and by a consistent margin. The EPYC 7713P, however, is not without merit, particularly in its server-oriented context. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy, but the choice between these two depends heavily on whether you are building for a single-socket workstation or populating a server rack.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Across the six Cinebench tests available in the data, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX achieves a clean sweep over the AMD EPYC 7713P. The margins are remarkably uniform. In the multi-core tests, the Threadripper PRO 5995WX scores 8182 in Cinebench R15, 34093 in R20, and 81175 in R23. The EPYC 7713P trails with 6978, 29076, and 69229 respectively. Each of these multi-core results represents a 14.7% deficit for the EPYC part. This is not a case of one workload favoring one chip; the performance gap is identical across all three rendering loads, suggesting a fundamental clock-speed advantage rather than an architectural scaling difference.

The single-core results tell the same story. The Threadripper PRO 5995WX posts 1155 in Cinebench R15, 4813 in R20, and 11460 in R23. The EPYC 7713P scores 984, 4104, and 9773 in those same tests. The deltas are 14.8% in R15, 14.7% in R20, and 14.7% in R23. The consistency of this gap is striking. When a single core is loaded, the Threadripper PRO 5995WX is simply faster, which directly reflects its higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz versus the EPYC's 3.68 GHz. The EPYC 7713P cannot claim a single benchmark win in this comparison.

Looking at the broader picture, the average benchmark scores for these CPUs are nearly identical. The EPYC 7713P has an average benchmark score of 20024, while the Threadripper PRO 5995WX sits at 19928. The delta between them is a mere 0.5%. This is a crucial data point. It means that while the Threadripper PRO 5995WX dominates in Cinebench, the EPYC 7713P is competitive or faster in other workloads not listed in the head-to-head table. The nearest rivals list confirms this, as the EPYC 7713P is actually 0.5% ahead of the Threadripper PRO 5995WX in average score. The two chips are effectively tied in overall performance, with the Threadripper PRO 5995WX holding a specific and consistent advantage in the Cinebench suite.

Where Each One Wins

The data points to a clear split. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX wins every Cinebench test, which is a proxy for 3D rendering and other heavily threaded compute tasks that scale with clock speed. If your workflow is dominated by rendering, simulation, or video encoding that relies on all cores at maximum frequency, the Threadripper PRO 5995WX is the stronger choice. Its higher base clock of 2.70 GHz and boost clock of 4.50 GHz give it a decisive edge in these sustained, all-core workloads. The data shows a 14.7% advantage in multi-core Cinebench, which is substantial for tasks that can run for hours.

The AMD EPYC 7713P, despite losing all head-to-head tests, has a higher average benchmark score overall. This indicates it wins in other benchmark categories not listed in the direct comparison. In a mixed workload environment, or in applications that are not purely clock-speed bound, the EPYC 7713P holds its own. Its lower base clock of 2.00 GHz might suggest a disadvantage, but its average score of 20024, which is higher than the Threadripper PRO 5995WX's 19928, implies that it excels in other types of tasks. For a server handling diverse database, virtualization, or cloud workloads, the EPYC 7713P's performance profile is clearly competitive.

The market segments reinforce this split. Both are listed as "Server/Workstation", but the EPYC 7713P is a single-socket server part, while the Threadripper PRO 5995WX is a workstation flagship. In a server context, you are not just looking at peak Cinebench scores; you are looking at total throughput across many concurrent jobs. The EPYC 7713P's competitive average score suggests it handles this broad mix efficiently. The Threadripper PRO 5995WX, with its dominant Cinebench scores, is tailored for the professional workstation user who needs maximum speed on a single, demanding task.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the same fundamental architecture. They share the Zen 3 core design and are manufactured on TSMC's 7 nm process node. The transistor count is identical at 33,200 million, and the die size is the same 8x 81 mm² configuration. This means the differences are not in the core design itself, but in how AMD has configured and binned the chips for their respective platforms.

The most significant difference is the clock speed. The EPYC 7713P has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.68 GHz. The Threadripper PRO 5995WX operates at a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. This 0.82 GHz boost clock advantage is the primary driver of the Threadripper PRO 5995WX's wins in Cinebench. This is a massive difference in frequency for two chips with the same core count and cache configuration. The higher clocks require more power, reflected in the TDP: the EPYC 7713P is rated at 225 W, while the Threadripper PRO 5995WX is rated at 280 W.

The cache layout is identical. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 cache per core, with a shared 256 MB L3 cache. Memory support is also the same: DDR4 with an eight-channel memory bus and 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth, along with ECC support. PCIe connectivity is also equal, with Gen 4 and 128 lanes available from the CPU. The sockets differ, which is a critical physical constraint. The EPYC 7713P uses AMD Socket SP3, while the Threadripper PRO 5995WX uses AMD Socket WRX8. These sockets are not interchangeable, meaning you are locked into a specific platform and motherboard ecosystem based on your choice.

The release dates differ, with the EPYC 7713P launching on 2021-03-14 and the Threadripper PRO 5995WX launching a year later on 2022-03-07. The production status for both is listed as "Active". The EPYC 7713P is part of the EPYC 7003 series with the codename "Milan", while the Threadripper PRO 5995WX is part of the 5000 series with the codename "Chagall PRO". This confirms that while they are architecturally similar, they are distinct product lines tuned for different purposes.

The Verdict

If your primary concern is raw multi-threaded performance in applications like Cinebench, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX is the clear winner. It is 14.7% faster in every multi-core and single-core Cinebench test. This is a significant margin that will translate directly into faster render times and shorter compute cycles. The data shows that for a workstation where you are rendering frames or processing large datasets on a single machine, the Threadripper PRO 5995WX is the superior processor. Its higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz makes it the definitive choice for users who prioritize speed on a per-task basis.

The AMD EPYC 7713P, however, holds a slight edge in average benchmark score, coming in at 20024 versus the Threadripper PRO 5995WX's 19928. This suggests that in a wider variety of benchmarks, it is not slower overall. For a server environment where you are running many concurrent virtual machines, databases, or mixed workloads, the EPYC 7713P's performance profile is more balanced. It does not have the peak Cinebench performance of the Threadripper PRO 5995WX, but its average score indicates it does not fall behind in other areas. The lower TDP of 225 W versus 280 W is also a consideration for dense server deployments where power and cooling are at a premium.

The choice is therefore a matter of platform and workload. If you are building a single-socket workstation and need the absolute best Cinebench scores, pick the Threadripper PRO 5995WX. If you are building a server that needs to handle a diverse set of tasks efficiently across 64 cores, the EPYC 7713P is the more appropriate part. The 0.5% difference in average score is negligible, but the 14.7% difference in Cinebench is not. The Threadripper PRO 5995WX is the workstation champion; the EPYC 7713P is the server workhorse.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX scores 81175, which is 14.7% higher than the AMD EPYC 7713P's score of 69229.

Q: Does the AMD EPYC 7713P win any of the direct head-to-head benchmarks?

A: No. The data shows the Threadripper PRO 5995WX wins all 6 head-to-head tests, with the EPYC 7713P trailing by 14.7% to 14.8% in each.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark score between the two?

A: The EPYC 7713P has an average benchmark score of 20024, which is 0.5% higher than the Threadripper PRO 5995WX's score of 19928.

Q: Do both processors support the same amount of L3 cache?

A: Yes, both the EPYC 7713P and the Threadripper PRO 5995WX have 256 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Are the sockets for these two CPUs the same?

A: No. The EPYC 7713P uses AMD Socket SP3, while the Threadripper PRO 5995WX uses AMD Socket WRX8. They are not interchangeable.

Q: What is the boost clock difference between the two processors?

A: The Threadripper PRO 5995WX has a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, while the EPYC 7713P has a boost clock of 3.68 GHz, a difference of 0.82 GHz.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 7713P | AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 2.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.68 GHz | 4.50 GHz |

| TDP | 225 W | 280 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3 | AMD Socket WRX8 |

| Codename | Milan | Chagall PRO |

| Generation | EPYC (Zen 3 (Milan)) | Ryzen Threadripper (Zen 3 (Chagall)) |

| Release Date | 2021-03-14 | 2022-03-07 |

| Launch MSRP | $5010 | $6499 |

| Part Number | 100-000000337100-000000337WOF | 100-000000444 |