AMD EPYC 9135 vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data separates these two AMD Zen 5 processors into distinct deployment profiles. The AMD EPYC 9135 wins 13 of 17 head-to-head tests, while the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX wins 4. The EPYC 9135 is the stronger multi-threaded and data-path processor, with clear margins in compression, encryption, floating-point math, and integer math. The Threadripper PRO 9945WX counters with a decisive single-thread advantage and wins in prime-number finding and physics simulation.

For rack-scale server workloads, the database points to the EPYC 9135. Its 16 cores and 32 threads, combined with a twelve-channel memory bus delivering 576.0 GB/s, give it a structural edge in bandwidth-sensitive tasks. The Threadripper PRO 9945WX, with 12 cores and 24 threads, is the choice when raw per-core speed matters more than aggregate throughput, particularly for workstation applications that rely on high single-thread performance. The EPYC 9135 sits at the 96th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Threadripper PRO 9945WX sits at the 95th percentile, so both are elite parts overall, but they serve different masters.

If the workload is dense virtualization, database serving, or large-scale data processing, the EPYC 9135 is the data-backed pick. If the workload is interactive modeling, simulation with single-threaded solvers, or latency-sensitive desktop-class applications, the Threadripper PRO 9945WX has the measurable single-core edge.

Architecture Differences

Both processors use the Zen 5 architecture and are fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm process node, with the same 16,630 million transistor count and dual-die design measuring 2x 70.6 mm². The architectural split appears elsewhere.

The EPYC 9135 belongs to the EPYC 9005 series, codename Turin, and uses AMD Socket SP5. The Threadripper PRO 9945WX belongs to the 9000 series, codename Shimada Peak, and uses AMD Socket sTR5. The EPYC 9135 launches with 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Threadripper PRO 9945WX launches with 12 cores and 24 threads.

Per-core cache allocations differ. The EPYC 9135 carries 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, with 64 MB of shared L3. The Threadripper PRO 9945WX carries 64 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, also with 64 MB of L3. The L2 is identical, but the L1 and core count differ.

Clock speeds show a clear divergence. The EPYC 9135 has a base clock of 3.65 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The Threadripper PRO 9945WX has a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, which explains its single-thread dominance. The Threadripper PRO 9945WX also has an unlocked multiplier, while the EPYC 9135 does not.

Memory architecture diverges significantly. The EPYC 9135 uses a twelve-channel DDR5 bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Threadripper PRO 9945WX uses an eight-channel DDR5 bus with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. Both offer PCIe Gen 5 with 128 lanes (CPU only), and neither has integrated graphics. The EPYC 9135 has a TDP of 200, while the Threadripper PRO 9945WX has a TDP of 350.

The EPYC 9135 was released on 2024-10-09, while the Threadripper PRO 9945WX was released on 2025-06-30. The EPYC 9135 has a launch MSRP of $1214, while the Threadripper PRO 9945WX has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better multi-core performance in Cinebench?

A: The AMD EPYC 9135 wins all three Cinebench multi-core tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 4952 versus 4871 for the Threadripper PRO 9945WX, a 1.7% margin. In R20 multi-core, it scores 20637 versus 20296. In R23 multi-core, it scores 49136 versus 48325. The EPYC 9135 wins each by exactly 1.7%.

Q: How large is the single-thread performance gap?

A: The Threadripper PRO 9945WX leads in PassMark single-thread, scoring 4573 versus 3672 for the EPYC 9135, a 19.7% advantage. However, in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 single-core tests, the EPYC 9135 leads by 1.7% in each instance (699 vs 687, 2913 vs 2865, 6936 vs 6822 respectively).

Q: Which processor handles data compression and encryption faster?

A: The EPYC 9135 is substantially ahead in both. In PassMark data compression, it scores 739277 versus 671963, a 10% advantage. In data encryption, it scores 40295 versus 36540, a 10.3% advantage. These are the largest single-test margins outside of floating-point math.

Q: Does the Threadripper PRO 9945WX win any benchmark categories?

A: Yes, it wins 4 of 17 head-to-head tests. It wins PassMark find prime numbers (335 vs 292, a 12.8% margin for the Threadripper), PassMark physics (6118 vs 5477, a 10.5% margin), and both PassMark single-thread tests (4573 vs 3672, a 19.7% margin).

Q: How do the memory bandwidth specifications compare?

A: The EPYC 9135 has a twelve-channel memory bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Threadripper PRO 9945WX has an eight-channel bus with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth. This 166.4 GB/s difference favors the EPYC 9135 in memory-intensive workloads.

Q: Are both processors on the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both are built on TSMC's 4 nm process node with 16,630 million transistors and a dual-die package of 2x 70.6 mm². They also share the Zen 5 architecture, though the EPYC 9135 uses the Turin codename and the Threadripper PRO 9945WX uses Shimada Peak.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD EPYC 9135 | AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX |

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

| Series | EPYC 9005 series | 9000 series |

| Cores | 16 | 12 |

| Threads | 32 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 3.65 | 4.70 |

| Boost Clock | 4.30 | 5.40 |

| TDP | 200 | 350 |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP5 | AMD Socket sTR5 |

| Codename | Turin | Shimada Peak |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

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

| Memory Bus | Twelve-channel | Eight-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 576.0 GB/s | 409.6 GB/s |

| Release Date | 2024-10-09 | 2025-06-30 |

| Launch MSRP | $1214 | null |

| Multiplier Unlocked | false | true |

| Part Number | 100-000001150 | 100-000000726 |

Shared specifications include the Zen 5 architecture, 4 nm process node from TSMC, 16,630 million transistors, 2x 70.6 mm² die size, 1 MB L2 cache per core, DDR5 memory support, ECC memory support, PCIe Gen 5 with 128 lanes (CPU only), no integrated graphics, server/workstation market segment, and active production status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The EPYC 9135 dominates the head-to-head record with 13 wins against 4 for the Threadripper PRO 9945WX. The margins tell the story of where each part excels.

The largest EPYC 9135 victory comes in PassMark floating-point math, where it scores 126679 versus 111566 for the Threadripper PRO 9945WX, a 13.5% advantage. This is followed by data encryption at 40295 versus 36540, a 10.3% margin, and data compression at 739277 versus 671963, a 10% margin. Integer math also favors the EPYC 9135, with 202962 versus 185421, a 9.5% lead. Random string sorting goes to the EPYC 9135 at 90064 versus 84498, a 6.6% margin. Extended instructions show a narrower EPYC 9135 win, 55822 versus 54406, a 2.6% edge.

Cinebench results are uniformly close. Across all six Cinebench tests (R15, R20, R23, each with multi-core and single-core variants), the EPYC 9135 wins by exactly 1.7% every time. For multi-core, the scores are 4952 vs 4871, 20637 vs 20296, and 49136 vs 48325. For single-core, they are 699 vs 687, 2913 vs 2865, and 6936 vs 6822. The consistency of the 1.7% margin suggests the EPYC 9135's extra 4 cores and 8 threads provide a small but repeatable advantage in Cinebench's workload profile.

PassMark multithread is the closest test overall. The EPYC 9135 scores 57170 versus 56854 for the Threadripper PRO 9945WX, a mere 0.6% margin. This near-tie indicates that despite the core-count difference, the Threadripper PRO 9945WX's higher clocks (4.70 base, 5.40 boost versus 3.65 and 4.30) nearly close the gap in mixed-threaded workloads.

The Threadripper PRO 9945WX's wins are concentrated in single-thread and specific compute patterns. Its PassMark single-thread score of 4573 versus 3672 represents a 19.7% advantage, the largest margin in either direction across all 17 tests. In PassMark find prime numbers, it scores 335 versus 292, a 12.8% lead. In PassMark physics, it scores 6118 versus 5477, a 10.5% margin. These three wins, plus the duplicate single-thread entry, showcase the Threadripper PRO 9945WX's strength in latency-bound, per-core compute tasks.

The data suggests a clear division of labor. The EPYC 9135's twelve-channel memory bus and higher core count drive wins in throughput-heavy tasks like compression, encryption, and math operations. The Threadripper PRO 9945WX's high clock speeds and unlocked multiplier make it the better fit for single-threaded responsiveness and physics-style workloads. The average benchmark scores reflect this split: the EPYC 9135 averages 82980 across all tests, while the Threadripper PRO 9945WX averages 76513, a difference of 6467 points in favor of the EPYC 9135.