AMD EPYC 9255 vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD EPYC 9255 records an average benchmark score of 116388, while the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX records 101041. The EPYC 9255 sits in the 97th percentile of all CPUs, and its closest rival, the Intel Xeon 658X, scores 116060, a delta of 0.3%. The Threadripper PRO 9955WX also sits in the 97th percentile, with the AMD EPYC 7513 at 102244, a delta of -1.2%.

Q: How do the two chips compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The EPYC 9255 scores 64318 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 8.1% ahead of the Threadripper PRO 9955WX's 59494. This pattern repeats across all Cinebench versions, with the EPYC 9255 leading by roughly 8.1% in R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests.

Q: Which processor wins in single-thread performance?

A: The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX wins PassMark single-thread tests with a score of 4530, which is 19.3% ahead of the EPYC 9255's 3655. However, in Cinebench single-core tests, the EPYC 9255 leads, scoring 9080 in R23 single-core versus 8399 for the Threadripper, an 8.1% advantage.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD EPYC 9255 has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX has 16 cores and 32 threads. The EPYC 9255 therefore offers 50% more cores and threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The EPYC 9255 supports twelve-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s. The Threadripper PRO 9955WX supports eight-channel DDR5 with 409.6 GB/s. The EPYC 9255 provides roughly 40.6% more memory bandwidth.

Q: Do both processors support PCIe Gen 5?

A: Yes, both the EPYC 9255 and the Threadripper PRO 9955WX support PCIe Gen 5 with 128 lanes (CPU only). Neither processor includes integrated graphics.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on AMD's Zen 5 architecture and manufactured by TSMC on a 4 nm process, but they diverge significantly in their physical construction and platform design. The EPYC 9255, codenamed Turin, belongs to the EPYC 9005 series and uses the AMD Socket SP5. The Threadripper PRO 9955WX, codenamed Shimada Peak, belongs to the 9000 series and uses the AMD Socket sTR5.

The transistor counts differ substantially. The EPYC 9255 integrates 33,260 million transistors across a die configuration of 4x 70.6 mm². The Threadripper PRO 9955WX integrates 16,630 million transistors across 2x 70.6 mm². This means the EPYC 9255 has roughly double the transistor count and double the number of compute dies.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The EPYC 9255 provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 128 MB of shared L3 cache. The Threadripper PRO 9955WX provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 64 MB of L3 cache. The EPYC 9255 thus offers double the L3 capacity.

Memory architecture is another major split. The EPYC 9255 uses a twelve-channel memory bus with 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Threadripper PRO 9955WX uses an eight-channel bus with 409.6 GB/s. Both support DDR5 memory and ECC memory. The EPYC 9255 is aimed at the server/workstation segment, while the Threadripper PRO 9955WX is classified as a desktop processor, though its multiplier is unlocked; the EPYC 9255's multiplier is locked.

The Threadripper PRO 9955WX has a base clock of 4.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, notably higher than the EPYC 9255's 3.25 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost clock.

The EPYC 9255 has a TDP of 200 watts, while the Threadripper PRO 9955WX has a TDP of 350 watts.

The EPYC 9255 was released on 2024-10-09, while the Threadripper PRO 9955WX was released on 2025-07-22.

The EPYC 9255 has a part number of 100-000000694, and the Threadripper PRO 9955WX has a part number of 100-000000725.

The production status for both parts is Active.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 9255 is the clear winner in multi-threaded and server-oriented workloads. It wins 14 out of the 17 recorded head-to-head benchmark comparisons. Its advantages are largest in PassMark physics, where it scores 9740, a 134.4% lead over the Threadripper's 4156. Data encryption also favors the EPYC 9255, with a 34.4% lead. Prime number finding shows a 72.1% gap. Integer math, random string sorting, floating-point math, multithread, and data compression all favor the EPYC 9255 by margins from 10.6% to 29.8%.

The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX wins only 3 of the 17 head-to-head benchmarks. The Threadripper PRO 9955WX wins PassMark single-thread tests with 4530, a 19.3% lead over the EPYC 9255's 3655. It also wins PassMark extended instructions with 76363, a 1.5% lead. These wins are narrow or single-thread-specific.

The EPYC 9255's strength comes from its 24 cores, 48 threads, and 128 MB of L3 cache, combined with twelve-channel memory bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s. The EPYC 9255's architecture prioritizes memory bandwidth and multi-die parallelism. Its 4x 70.6 mm² configuration and 33,260 million transistors provide massive throughput for parallel tasks like encryption and integer math.

The Threadripper PRO 9955WX's strength lies in higher clock speeds. Its 4.8 GHz boost clock and 5.4 GHz boost clock allow it to achieve higher PassMark single-thread performance. Its lower core count and 64 MB L3 cache are paired with an eight-channel memory bus. Its 16,330 million transistors and 2x 70.6 mm² die configuration are optimized for desktop workloads, not server-scale throughput.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification field. The EPYC 9255 has 24 cores and 48 threads, while the Threadripper PRO 9955WX has 16 cores and 32 threads, a 50% difference in both cores and threads.

Base clock is 3.25 GHz on the EPYC 9255 and 4.50 GHz on the Threadripper PRO 9955WX. Boost clock is 4.80 GHz on the EPYC 9255 and 4.80 GHz on the Threadripper PRO 9955WX.

TDP is 200 watts for the EPYC 9255 and 350 watts for the Threadripper PRO 9955WX.

Socket is SP5 for the EPYC 9255, which uses AMD Socket SP5, and the Threadripper PRO 9955WX, which uses AMD Socket sTR5.

Codename is Turin for the EPYC 9255, and Shimada Peak for the Threadripper PRO 9955WX.

Generation is EPYC (Zen 5 (Turin)) for the EPYC 9255, and Ryzen Threadripper (Zen 4 (Storm Peak)) for the Threadripper PRO 9955WX, though the architecture field says Zen 5 for both.

Process node is 4 nm for the EPYC 9255, and 4 nm TSMC for the foundry.

Transistors are 33,260 million for the EPYC 9255, and 16,630 million for the Threadripper PRO 9955WX. Die size is 4x 70.6 mm² for the EPYC 9255, and 2x 70.6 mm² for the Threadripper PRO 9955WX.

L1 cache is 80 KB per core for the EPYC 9255, and 64 KB per core for the Threadripper PRO 9955WX. L2 cache is 1 MB per core for both. L3 cache is 128 MB shared for the EPYC 9255, and 64 MB for the Threadripper PRO 9955WX.

Memory support is DDR5 for both, but memory bus is twelve-channel for the EPYC 9255 and eight-channel for the Threadripper PRO 9955WX. Memory bandwidth is 576.0 GB/s for the EPYC 9255 and 409.6 GB/s for the Threadripper PRO 9955WX.

ECC memory is true for both. PCIe is Gen 5, 128 lanes (CPU only) for both. Integrated graphics are N/A for both.

Market segment is Server/Workstation for the EPYC 9255, and Desktop for the Threadripper PRO 9955WX. Production status is Active for both. Release date is 2024-10-09 for the EPYC 9255, and 2025-07-22 for the Threadripper PRO 9955WX. Launch MSRP is $2495 for the EPYC 9255, and $1649 for the Threadripper PRO 9955WX. Multiplier unlocked is false for the EPYC 9255 and true for the Threadripper PRO 9955WX.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The EPYC 9255 dominates the Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 9255 scores 6483 against 5996, an 8.1% lead. Single-core R15 shows 915 versus 846, also 8.2%. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the EPYC 9255 scores 27013 versus 24987, an 8.1% lead. Single-core R20 shows 3813 versus 3527, an 8.1% lead. Cinebench R23 multi-core gives 64318 versus 59494, an 8.1% lead, and single-core R23 gives 9080 versus 8399, an 8.1% lead.

The PassMark suite shows a wider spread. The largest win for the EPYC 9255 is in PassMark physics, where it scores 9740 versus 4156, a 134.4% advantage. This is the single biggest delta in the entire comparison. Data encryption also heavily favors the EPYC 9255, with 59668 versus 44389, a 34.4% lead. Integer math shows a 29.8% advantage, with 306442 versus 236120. Random string sorting gives a 29.4% lead, with 129202 versus 99813. Floating-point math shows a 17.4% lead, with 183367 versus 156215. PassMark multithread gives a 14.2% lead, with 76580 versus 67035. Data compression shows a 10.6% lead, with 1018904 versus 920954.

The Threadripper PRO 9955WX wins in PassMark single-thread tests, scoring 4530 versus 3655, a 19.3% advantage. It also wins PassMark extended instructions, scoring 76363 versus 75185, a 1.5% lead. These are the only two wins for the Threadripper PRO 9955WX in the head-to-head set, plus the duplicate PassMark singlethread entry with the same 4530 versus 3655 result.

The overall picture is clear. The EPYC 9255 wins 14 of 17 benchmarks, with the Threadripper PRO 9955WX winning 3. The average benchmark scores confirm the EPYC 9255's position at 116388 against 101041, a 15.2% overall average gap. The EPYC 9255 sits in the 97th percentile versus all CPUs, and its nearest rival, the Intel Xeon 658X at 116060, trails by just 0.3%. The Threadripper PRO 9955WX also sits in the 97th percentile, with its closest rival, the AMD EPYC 7513 at 102244, trailing by -1.2%.

The EPYC 9255's wins are characterized by massive margins, often over 29%, in server-like workloads. The Threadripper PRO 9955WX's wins are either narrow, at 1.5%, or single-threaded performance. For any workload that stresses memory bandwidth, integer math, encryption, physics, or data compression, the EPYC 9255 is the better performer by a wide margin. For single-threaded desktop tasks, the Threadripper PRO 9955WX's higher clock speed gives it a 19.3% edge.