AMD EPYC 9634 vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two AMD processors into clearly distinct roles. The AMD EPYC 9634 wins 8 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, while the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX takes 9. But the margin and nature of those wins tell the real story.

The EPYC 9634 dominates in throughput-heavy workloads. Its largest victories come in PassMark data encryption, where it scores 151,943 against 85,035, a 78.7% advantage. Prime number finding shows an even wider gap at 89.7% (1176 versus 620). Integer math follows with a 57.1% lead (725,356 versus 461,724), and physics simulation trails at 68.6% (12,291 versus 7,288). Data compression favors the EPYC by 36% (2,236,412 versus 1,644,573), and random string sorting by 38.9% (261,134 versus 188,014). Floating-point math adds a 16.1% win (353,784 versus 304,833), and the PassMark multithread test shows a narrower 2.9% edge (107,944 versus 104,902).

The Threadripper PRO 9975WX, by contrast, sweeps the Cinebench suite. It wins R15 multicore by 1.9% (9,430 versus 9,248), R15 singlecore by 2% (1,331 versus 1,305), R20 multicore by 1.9% (39,292 versus 38,535), R20 singlecore by 1.9% (5,546 versus 5,440), R23 multicore by 1.9% (93,553 versus 91,752), and R23 singlecore by 1.9% (13,207 versus 12,953). Its single-thread PassMark score is dramatically higher at 4,408 versus 2,924, a 33.7% advantage. The only other Threadripper win is marginal: extended instructions at 137,733 versus 137,543, a 0.1% difference.

The pattern is unmistakable. The EPYC 9634 excels at parallel, data-heavy operations that scale with core count. The Threadripper PRO 9975WX wins in latency-sensitive, lightly threaded tasks and in Cinebench's rendering workloads despite having far fewer cores.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different generations and use different silicon. The EPYC 9634 is built on Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Genoa, on TSMC's 5 nm process. It packs 84 cores and 168 threads, with a base clock of 2.25 GHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. The Threadripper PRO 9975WX uses newer Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Shimada Peak, on a 4 nm process. It has 32 cores and 64 threads, with a much higher base clock of 4.00 GHz and boost clock of 5.40 GHz.

The transistor counts reflect the scale difference. The EPYC 9634 contains 78,840 million transistors across 12 dies of 72 mm² each. The Threadripper PRO 9975WX has 33,260 million transistors across 4 dies of 70.6 mm² each. That larger EPYC package supplies far more L3 cache: 384 MB shared versus 128 MB. Both have identical per-core L1 and L2 allocations (64 KB and 1 MB per core).

Memory channels differ too. The EPYC 9634 runs a twelve-channel DDR5 memory bus with 460.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Threadripper PRO 9975WX uses an eight-channel DDR5 bus at 409.6 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity is identical: Gen 5 with 128 lanes from the CPU.

Thermal design power favors the EPYC in one sense: 290 W versus 350 W for the Threadripper. The Threadripper has an unlocked multiplier, while the EPYC does not. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP5; the Threadripper uses AMD Socket sTR5. Neither has integrated graphics on the Threadripper side, and the EPYC lists no integrated graphics at all.

Release timing is notable. The EPYC 9634 launched on 2022-11-09, while the Threadripper PRO 9975WX arrived on 2025-07-22. The EPYC belongs to the EPYC 9004 series; the Threadripper sits in the 9000 series.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear use-case split. For server deployments where encryption, compression, integer math, and physics simulations dominate, the AMD EPYC 9634 is the stronger choice. Its 84 cores and 384 MB L3 cache drive massive parallel throughput. The 78.7% lead in encryption and 89.7% lead in prime finding are not marginal; they are generational gaps. The EPYC also holds a 99th percentile ranking among all CPUs in the database, versus the Threadripper's 98th percentile.

For workstation users running Cinebench, single-threaded tasks, or extended instruction workloads, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX wins. Its higher clocks, 4.00 GHz base and 5.40 GHz boost, plus Zen 5's improved IPC, deliver better Cinebench scores across every version tested. The 33.7% single-thread PassMark advantage is decisive for interactive responsiveness and lightly threaded applications.

The average benchmark scores summarize the split. The EPYC 9634 averages 244,274 across all tests, with nearest rivals including the Intel Xeon 6747P (2.5% slower) and AMD EPYC 9684X (8.5% faster). The Threadripper PRO 9975WX averages 182,700, with rivals like the AMD EPYC 8534P (1.3% faster) and Intel Xeon 6740P (3.7% slower). The EPYC's higher average comes from its wins in heavyweight parallel tests, which carry larger score magnitudes.

Do not mistake the Threadripper's lower core count for weakness. It wins 9 of 17 head-to-head tests, including every Cinebench benchmark. But when the EPYC wins, it wins big. The data shows a tradeoff between raw core scaling and per-core efficiency.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD EPYC 9634 has 84 cores and 168 threads. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX has 32 cores and 64 threads.

Q: Does the Threadripper PRO 9975WX beat the EPYC 9634 in any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins all six Cinebench tests (R15, R20, R23, each in single and multicore), the PassMark single-thread test, and the extended instructions test. Its single-thread PassMark score is 33.7% higher.

Q: What is the L3 cache difference?

A: The EPYC 9634 has 384 MB of shared L3 cache. The Threadripper PRO 9975WX has 128 MB. Both have 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The EPYC 9634 uses a twelve-channel DDR5 bus with 460.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Threadripper PRO 9975WX uses an eight-channel DDR5 bus with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth. Both support ECC.

Q: Which chip has the higher boost clock?

A: The Threadripper PRO 9975WX boosts to 5.40 GHz, compared to 3.70 GHz for the EPYC 9634. The Threadripper also has a higher base clock at 4.00 GHz versus 2.25 GHz.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The EPYC 9634 has a TDP of 290 W. The Threadripper PRO 9975WX has a TDP of 350 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results are the Threadripper PRO 9975WX's home turf. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 9,430 versus 9,248 for the EPYC, a 1.9% edge. R15 singlecore shows 1,331 versus 1,305, a 2% margin. R20 multicore gives 39,292 versus 38,535 (1.9%), and R20 singlecore gives 5,546 versus 5,440 (1.9%). R23 multicore is 93,553 versus 91,752 (1.9%), while R23 singlecore is 13,207 versus 12,953 (1.9%). These are consistent, modest wins across every rendering benchmark in the suite.

PassMark tells a different story. The EPYC 9634's 151,943 in data encryption dwarfs the Threadripper's 85,035, a 78.7% advantage. In find prime numbers, the EPYC scores 1,176 against 620, an 89.7% lead. Integer math shows 725,356 versus 461,724, a 57.1% gap. Physics produces 12,291 versus 7,288, a 68.6% margin. Data compression yields 2,236,412 versus 1,644,573 (36%), and random string sorting gives 261,134 versus 188,014 (38.9%). Floating-point math adds 353,784 versus 304,833, a 16.1% win. Even the multithread test, often a mixed bag, goes to the EPYC at 107,944 versus 104,902, a 2.9% edge.

The extended instructions test is nearly a tie: 137,733 for the Threadripper versus 137,543 for the EPYC, a 0.1% difference that could be noise. The single-thread PassMark test is not close: 4,408 for the Threadripper versus 2,924 for the EPYC, a 33.7% blowout.

The aggregate picture from the database's nearest rival comparisons adds context. The EPYC 9634's average score of 244,274 places it 2.5% ahead of the Intel Xeon 6747P and 12.1% ahead of the AMD EPYC 9455P, while trailing the AMD EPYC 9684X by 8.5% and the Intel Xeon 6980P by 2.9%. The Threadripper PRO 9975WX averages 182,700, which is 1.5% ahead of the AMD EPYC 7763 and 3.7% ahead of the Intel Xeon 6740P, but 1.3% behind the AMD EPYC 8534P and 2.7% behind the Intel Xeon 6740E.

Both processors are active production parts. The EPYC 9634 carries a launch MSRP of $10304. The Threadripper PRO 9975WX carries a launch MSRP of $4099. The EPYC targets scale-out server workloads with massive core counts and cache; the Threadripper targets workstation tasks where single-thread speed and rendering efficiency matter more. The data does not declare an overall winner, because the workloads do not agree on what winning means.