AMD EPYC 9565 vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark record shows a dominant performance profile for the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX across nearly every measured workload. Out of 17 head-to-head tests, the Threadripper PRO 9995WX wins 15, while the AMD EPYC 9565 claims only 2. The most striking margin comes in integer math, where the Threadripper scores 1,203,634 against the EPYC’s 717,948, a 67.6% advantage. This is the single largest delta in the comparison and points to a substantial throughput advantage in arithmetic-heavy, multi-threaded workloads.

Cinebench results are uniformly in favor of the Threadripper PRO 9995WX, with a consistent 29.3% lead across all six versions and core-count tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Threadripper records 148,601 versus the EPYC’s 114,937. The single-core R23 scores follow the same pattern: 20,979 against 16,226. This consistency suggests that the Threadripper’s advantage is not limited to scaling across cores but also applies to per-thread performance, as demonstrated by the identical 29.3% delta in both single- and multi-core runs.

Data-intensive PassMark tests also favor the Threadripper. Data compression shows a 44.3% lead (3,723,652 vs 2,579,631), while data encryption posts a 45.6% gap (206,662 vs 141,936). Random string sorting is 43.5% faster (418,973 vs 291,941). Floating-point math, a common proxy for scientific and simulation workloads, favors the Threadripper by 32% (725,066 vs 549,422). Extended instruction set performance is 29.1% higher (270,647 vs 209,595).

The EPYC 9565 does secure two wins, and they merit attention. In the find prime numbers test, the EPYC scores 2,422 compared to the Threadripper’s 1,476, a 39.1% advantage in the Threadripper’s favor reversed. This is a notable counterpoint, as prime-number sieving is often sensitive to memory latency and cache hierarchy. The EPYC also edges ahead in the physics test, scoring 18,036 against 16,860, a 6.5% margin. These two wins suggest that the EPYC’s memory subsystem and core configuration provide specific advantages in certain algorithmic patterns.

The multi-thread PassMark score sums up the overall trend: 171,200 for the Threadripper versus 135,221 for the EPYC, a 26.6% lead. Single-thread scores show a 22.9% gap (4,542 vs 3,696). In aggregate, the average benchmark score for the Threadripper PRO 9995WX is 412,068, placing it at the 100th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The EPYC 9565 averages 285,471, which lands it at the 99th percentile. The Threadripper’s nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 9745, sits 3.3% higher in average score, while the EPYC 9655P trails the Threadripper by 3.6%.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on AMD’s Zen 5 architecture and manufactured on a 4nm process at TSMC, with the same transistor count of 99,780 million and a die composed of 12 chiplets at 70.6 mm² each. The core counts diverge significantly: the Threadripper PRO 9995WX packs 96 cores and 192 threads, while the EPYC 9565 offers 72 cores and 144 threads. That difference alone explains much of the multi-threaded performance gap.

Clock speeds tell a complementary story. The Threadripper runs a base clock of 2.50 GHz and boosts to 5.40 GHz. The EPYC starts higher at 3.15 GHz base but tops out at 4.30 GHz boost. The Threadripper’s higher boost ceiling contributes to its single-thread lead, despite the EPYC’s higher base frequency. Thermal design power also differs: the Threadripper is rated at 350W, the EPYC at 400W.

Cache configurations share a common L3 size of 384 MB, but the per-core L1 allocation differs. The Threadripper provides 64 KB of L1 per core, while the EPYC provides 80 KB per core. Both offer 1 MB of L2 per core. The EPYC’s larger L1 per core may partially explain its win in the prime number test, where rapid access to small data sets is critical.

Memory support is another key differentiator. Both use DDR5 with ECC, but the EPYC 9565 runs a twelve-channel memory bus with 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Threadripper PRO 9995WX uses an eight-channel bus with 409.6 GB/s. The EPYC’s 40% higher memory bandwidth is a structural advantage for memory-heavy server workloads, even though the Threadripper wins most benchmark tests in this comparison.

PCIe connectivity is identical on paper: Gen 5 with 128 lanes (CPU only) for both. Neither processor includes integrated graphics. The socket platforms differ, with the Threadripper on AMD Socket sTR5 and the EPYC on AMD Socket SP5. The Threadripper has an unlocked multiplier, while the EPYC is locked. The Threadripper PRO 9995WX launched in July 2025, while the EPYC 9565 launched in October 2024, making the EPYC the earlier release.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX is the clear choice for workloads that demand maximum core count and high single-thread boost. Its 96 cores and 192 threads, paired with a 5.40 GHz boost clock, deliver dominant results in Cinebench multi-core rendering, integer math, and data compression. The 67.6% lead in integer math and the 44.3% lead in data compression indicate that this processor excels in compilation, code analysis, and any task involving heavy arithmetic over large data sets. For workstation users running 3D rendering, video encoding, or simulation software that scales across cores, the Threadripper’s consistent 29.3% advantage across all Cinebench versions is decisive.

The EPYC 9565 wins in two specific scenarios. The prime number test, where it leads by 39.1%, suggests an advantage in workloads that rely on rapid iteration over small, frequently accessed data structures, possibly benefiting from its higher base clock of 3.15 GHz and larger per-core L1 cache of 80 KB. The physics test win, a 6.5% margin, points to efficiency in certain vectorized physics simulations. Additionally, the EPYC’s twelve-channel memory bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth makes it structurally better suited for memory-bound server applications, even if the recorded benchmarks do not universally reflect that advantage.

For single-threaded responsiveness, the Threadripper leads by 22.9% in PassMark single-thread scores (4,542 vs 3,696). This means that even in lightly threaded tasks, the Threadripper PRO 9995WX feels faster per core. The EPYC’s higher base clock does not translate into a single-thread win, as the Threadripper’s higher boost clock dominates.

The overall picture is straightforward: the Threadripper PRO 9995WX is the performance leader in nearly every recorded metric, with its nearest rivals being the EPYC 9745 (3.3% higher average score) and the EPYC 9655P (3.6% lower). The EPYC 9565, despite its memory bandwidth advantage, sits 10.3% below the EPYC 9655 in average score and 30.7% below the Threadripper by the same metric.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX has 96 cores and 192 threads, while the AMD EPYC 9565 has 72 cores and 144 threads.

Q: What is the single biggest performance gap between the two?

A: In the PassMark integer math test, the Threadripper PRO 9995WX scores 1,203,634 versus the EPYC 9565’s 717,948, a 67.6% advantage.

Q: Does the EPYC 9565 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, the EPYC 9565 wins the passmark_find_prime_numbers test with a score of 2,422 versus 1,476 (a 39.1% lead) and the passmark_physics test with 18,036 versus 16,860 (a 6.5% lead).

Q: How do the memory bandwidths compare?

A: The EPYC 9565 supports a twelve-channel memory bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Threadripper PRO 9995WX uses an eight-channel bus with 409.6 GB/s.

Q: What is the boost clock difference?

A: The Threadripper PRO 9995WX boosts to 5.40 GHz, while the EPYC 9565 boosts to 4.30 GHz. The EPYC has a higher base clock at 3.15 GHz versus 2.50 GHz.

Q: Are both processors on the same socket?

A: No, the Threadripper PRO 9995WX uses AMD Socket sTR5, while the EPYC 9565 uses AMD Socket SP5.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX | AMD EPYC 9565 |

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

| Cores | 96 | 72 |

| Threads | 192 | 144 |

| Base clock | 2.50 GHz | 3.15 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.40 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| TDP | 350W | 400W |

| Socket | AMD Socket sTR5 | AMD Socket SP5 |

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

| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 384 MB | 384 MB (shared) |

| Memory bus | Eight-channel | Twelve-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 409.6 GB/s | 576.0 GB/s |

| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | No |

| Release date | 2025-07-22 | 2024-10-09 |

| Launch MSRP | $11700 | $10486 |

| Part number | 100-000001361 | 100-000001447 |

The two processors share the same Zen 5 architecture, 4nm process, TSMC foundry, transistor count of 99,780 million, die size of 12x 70.6 mm², DDR5 memory support, ECC memory capability, PCIe Gen 5 with 128 lanes, and the absence of integrated graphics. The Threadripper PRO 9995WX sits at the 100th percentile of all CPUs, while the EPYC 9565 sits at the 99th percentile. The Threadripper’s average benchmark score of 412,068 is 44.4% higher than the EPYC’s 285,471.