AMD EPYC 9655P vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX Comparison

The AMD EPYC 9655P and AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX are both Zen 5 behemoths, but the benchmark data separates them into two distinct roles. The EPYC 9655P wins 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, establishing itself as the undisputed multi-threaded throughput champion, while the Threadripper PRO 9985WX takes the single-thread crown with a commanding 14.1% lead in PassMark’s single-thread test. The EPYC 9655P is for massive parallel workloads that scale across its 96 cores, while the Threadripper PRO 9985WX is the more responsive choice for lightly-threaded tasks that demand raw clock speed.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 9655P dominates in every category that rewards sheer core count and memory bandwidth. Its 96 cores and 192 threads give it a 50% core advantage over the Threadripper’s 64 cores and 128 threads, and the data shows this translates into overwhelming victories in math, encryption, and physics workloads. The largest gap appears in PassMark physics, where the EPYC scores 25,847 against the Threadripper’s 13,783 — a 87.5% advantage. Similarly, integer math shows a 40.4% lead (1,225,251 vs 872,710), and floating-point math is 29.4% ahead (715,866 vs 553,348). These are compute-heavy, highly parallel tasks where the EPYC’s extra cores and twelve-channel memory bus (576.0 GB/s vs 409.6 GB/s) simply overpower the competition.

The Threadripper PRO 9985WX wins only two tests, both measuring single-thread performance. Its PassMark single-thread score of 4,482 beats the EPYC’s 3,849 by 14.1%, a result directly attributable to its higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz versus the EPYC’s 4.50 GHz. This advantage is consistent across Cinebench single-core tests, though the margin is much smaller there — the EPYC actually wins those by 2.6%, meaning the Threadripper’s single-thread edge is workload-specific rather than universal. In passmark_single_thread, the Threadripper’s 3.20 GHz base clock and 5.40 GHz boost clock deliver the highest peak performance of the two, making it the better fit for applications that rely on low-latency, high-frequency execution rather than massive parallelism.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on TSMC’s 4 nm process with the Zen 5 architecture, but they diverge rapidly from there. The EPYC 9655P, codenamed Turin, uses 12 chiplets of 70.6 mm² each, totaling 99,780 million transistors. The Threadripper PRO 9985WX, codenamed Shimada Peak, uses 8 chiplets of the same 70.6 mm² size, totaling 66,520 million transistors. This chiplet count difference directly explains the core disparity: more chiplets mean more cores, and the EPYC packs 96 cores versus the Threadripper’s 64.

Cache configurations reinforce the EPYC’s server positioning. The EPYC provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a massive 384 MB of shared L3 cache. The Threadripper offers 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 256 MB of shared L3. The EPYC’s larger L3 cache is a direct consequence of its 12-chiplet design, and it provides a significant advantage in data-heavy workloads that can fit more working set in on-die memory.

Memory architecture is another major split. The EPYC 9655P supports twelve-channel DDR5 memory with 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Threadripper PRO 9985WX uses eight-channel DDR5 at 409.6 GB/s. Both support ECC memory, but the EPYC’s 40% higher memory bandwidth is critical for the server workloads it targets. Both CPUs offer Gen 5 PCIe with 128 lanes (CPU only), and neither includes integrated graphics. The EPYC uses Socket SP5 and is locked (multiplierUnlocked: false), while the Threadripper uses Socket sTR5 and has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. The EPYC launched on 2024-10-09, while the Threadripper arrived later on 2025-07-22.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results show a consistent but narrow EPYC lead. Across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both multi-core and single-core tests, the EPYC wins by exactly 2.6% in every case. For example, Cinebench R23 multi-core scores 136,354 for the EPYC versus 132,859 for the Threadripper, and R23 single-core scores 19,250 versus 18,756. This uniformity suggests the EPYC’s advantage in Cinebench comes from its higher core count and larger cache, but the Threadripper’s higher clocks keep the gap small.

The PassMark suite tells a more dramatic story. Data compression shows the EPYC at 3,486,158 versus 2,912,972, a 19.7% lead. Data encryption is even more lopsided: 220,074 versus 154,824, a 42.1% advantage. The EPYC’s 12-chiplet design and 384 MB L3 cache clearly accelerate encryption workloads that benefit from large on-die data and parallel execution. Find prime numbers shows a 48.2% lead (1,686 vs 1,138), and random string sorting is 37.3% ahead (451,824 vs 329,014). Extended instructions are close at 2.3% (230,609 vs 225,340), indicating the EPYC is only marginally better at SIMD-heavy tasks.

The physics test is the single largest gap in the entire comparison. The EPYC scores 25,847 versus 13,783, a 87.5% advantage that dwarfs any other difference. This likely reflects the EPYC’s combination of 96 cores, 384 MB L3, and twelve-channel memory, which together enable exceptional performance in physics simulations that parallelize well. The multithread test shows a more moderate 6.9% lead (160,490 vs 150,071), suggesting that some multithreaded workloads don’t scale perfectly with the EPYC’s extra cores.

The only bright spot for the Threadripper is passmark_single_thread, where it wins by 14.1% (4,482 vs 3,849). This is a decisive victory and highlights the trade-off: the Threadripper’s 5.40 GHz boost clock delivers far better single-thread responsiveness than the EPYC’s 4.50 GHz. For users running applications that are latency-sensitive or poorly threaded, this difference is meaningful, even though the EPYC wins all six Cinebench tests.

The Verdict

Choose the AMD EPYC 9655P if your workload is massively parallel and memory-hungry. The data shows it wins 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, with leads ranging from 2.3% in extended instructions to 87.5% in physics. Its 96 cores, 192 threads, 384 MB L3 cache, and 576.0 GB/s memory bandwidth make it the clear choice for server-class compute, data compression, encryption, and any multi-threaded benchmark where core count matters more than clock speed. The EPYC also holds a 100th percentile ranking versus all CPUs, while the Threadripper sits at 99th.

Choose the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX if single-thread performance is your priority. Its 14.1% lead in PassMark single-thread testing is the largest margin either CPU achieves in the direction of victory, and its 5.40 GHz boost clock is 0.90 GHz higher than the EPYC’s. The Threadripper also offers an unlocked multiplier, making it the only one of the two that supports overclocking. However, its 64 cores and 256 MB L3 cache leave it behind in every multi-threaded benchmark, and its average benchmark score of 320,749 is significantly lower than the EPYC’s 397,773.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The AMD EPYC 9655P wins 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, while the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX wins 2.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap in either direction?

A: The EPYC 9655P leads by 87.5% in PassMark physics (25,847 vs 13,783). The Threadripper PRO 9985WX leads by 14.1% in PassMark single-thread (4,482 vs 3,849).

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The EPYC 9655P has 96 cores and 192 threads, while the Threadripper PRO 9985WX has 64 cores and 128 threads.

Q: Which CPU has higher clock speeds?

A: The Threadripper PRO 9985WX has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, while the EPYC 9655P has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences?

A: The EPYC 9655P supports twelve-channel DDR5 with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Threadripper PRO 9985WX supports eight-channel DDR5 with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both CPUs support ECC memory and PCIe Gen 5?

A: Yes, both support ECC memory and offer Gen 5 PCIe with 128 lanes (CPU only).

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 9655P | AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX |

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

| Cores | 96 | 64 |

| Threads | 192 | 128 |

| Base Clock | 2.60 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.50 GHz | 5.40 GHz |

| TDP | 400 W | 350 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP5 | AMD Socket sTR5 |

| Codename | Turin | Shimada Peak |

| Transistors | 99,780 million | 66,520 million |

| Die Size | 12x 70.6 mm² | 8x 70.6 mm² |

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

| L3 Cache | 384 MB (shared) | 256 MB |

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

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

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

| Launch MSRP | $10811 | $7999 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |