AMD EPYC 9755 vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX Comparison

The AMD EPYC 9755 and AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX are both Zen 5 flagship parts, but they are built for different corners of the same market. The EPYC 9755 is a 128-core server monster, while the Threadripper PRO 9995WX is a 96-core workstation titan. Benchmark results show a clear split: the EPYC dominates computational throughput, while the Threadripper wins in single-threaded responsiveness and some multi-threaded tests. This analysis uses only the provided benchmark data to show where each processor excels.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 9755 wins the majority of raw compute workloads. In the head-to-head data, it takes 8 of 17 benchmark wins. Its most dominant areas are in PassMark’s integer and floating-point math, where it leads by 28.8% and 27.3% respectively. Data encryption is a massive win for the EPYC, with a 37.9% advantage, and data compression shows a 21.3% lead. Physics calculations are the EPYC’s biggest victory, scoring 64.9% higher than the Threadripper. Prime number finding (38.7% lead) and random string sorting (36.3% lead) also go to the EPYC. This pattern points to a processor that excels in heavily parallel, calculation-intensive server workloads.

The Threadripper PRO 9995WX, despite having fewer cores, wins 9 of the 17 benchmarks. Its most significant victory is in single-threaded performance, where it leads by 22.9% in PassMark’s single-thread test. It also wins every single Cinebench test, both single-core and multi-core, by a consistent 4.9% margin. The PassMark multithread test goes to the Threadripper by a slim 2.8%. This profile suggests the Threadripper is better suited for tasks that rely on high clock speeds and responsiveness, such as interactive workloads, 3D modeling, and software compilation where single-thread performance matters.

The split is clear: the EPYC 9755 is for massive parallel compute, while the Threadripper PRO 9995WX is for high-frequency, latency-sensitive work. The data shows the Threadripper wins the Cinebench suite, which is a common proxy for rendering and content creation performance. The EPYC wins the PassMark suite, which is a broader test of computational capabilities.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the Zen 5 architecture, but they are distinct implementations. The EPYC 9755 uses the Turin codename, while the Threadripper PRO 9995WX uses Shimada Peak. Both are manufactured by TSMC on a 4 nm process node. The EPYC packs 128 cores and 256 threads, while the Threadripper has 96 cores and 192 threads. This core count difference is the primary driver of the EPYC’s lead in multi-threaded compute tests.

The cache configurations differ significantly. The EPYC 9755 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and a massive 512 MB of shared L3 cache. The Threadripper PRO 9995WX has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 384 MB of L3 cache. The EPYC’s larger per-core L1 and total L3 cache help in data-heavy workloads. The transistor counts reflect the scale difference: the EPYC has 133,040 million transistors across 16 dies of 70.6 mm² each, while the Threadripper has 99,780 million transistors across 12 dies of the same size.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The EPYC 9755 supports a twelve-channel DDR5 memory bus with a bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s. The Threadripper PRO 9995WX uses an eight-channel DDR5 bus with a bandwidth of 409.6 GB/s. The EPYC’s 40% higher memory bandwidth is critical for feeding its 128 cores. Both support ECC memory. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP5, while the Threadripper uses AMD Socket sTR5. Both have 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes available from the CPU.

The Threadripper PRO 9995WX has an unlocked multiplier, while the EPYC 9755 is locked. The base and boost clocks also differ: the EPYC has a 2.70 GHz base and 4.10 GHz boost, while the Threadripper has a 2.50 GHz base and a much higher 5.40 GHz boost. This 1.3 GHz boost clock advantage explains the Threadripper’s single-thread performance lead. The Threadripper’s TDP is 350 W, while the EPYC’s TDP is 500 W.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple choice for most users. If your work is defined by massive parallel processing, the AMD EPYC 9755 is the correct pick. Its 128 cores, 512 MB of L3 cache, and 576.0 GB/s memory bandwidth deliver decisive wins in encryption, math, and physics workloads. The 38.7% lead in prime number finding and the 64.9% lead in physics show that this is a processor built for heavy scientific and financial computing. Its average benchmark score of 505,778 places it 22.7% ahead of the Threadripper PRO 9995WX in the overall average, and it sits 18.7% ahead of the AMD EPYC 9745.

For a workstation that needs to handle interactive tasks, rendering, and general productivity, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX is the better fit. Its 5.40 GHz boost clock delivers a 22.9% single-thread win, and it wins every Cinebench test by 4.9%. The unlockable multiplier is a bonus for enthusiasts who want to push clocks further. The Threadripper’s average benchmark score of 412,068 is 3.6% higher than the AMD EPYC 9655P and 10.3% higher than the AMD EPYC 9655, placing it in the same performance class as the EPYC 9745, which it trails by only 3.3%.

The EPYC 9755 is the server chip. The Threadripper PRO 9995WX is the workstation chip. Selecting the wrong one means sacrificing either raw throughput or single-thread responsiveness. The EPYC’s 8 wins are in the workloads that scale perfectly with core count, while the Threadripper’s 9 wins cover the workloads that benefit from high clocks and a more balanced multi-thread profile. Choose based on which benchmark family matches your primary applications.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-threaded workloads?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX is faster. It scores 4542 in PassMark single-thread, which is 22.9% higher than the AMD EPYC 9755’s 3503. It also wins all Cinebench single-core tests by 4.9%.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD EPYC 9755 has 128 cores and 256 threads. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX has 96 cores and 192 threads.

Q: Does the EPYC 9755 have more L3 cache?

A: Yes. The AMD EPYC 9755 has 512 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX has 384 MB of L3 cache.

Q: Which processor is better for data encryption?

A: The AMD EPYC 9755 is significantly better. It scores 284,927 in PassMark data encryption, which is 37.9% higher than the Threadripper’s 206,662.

Q: Are both processors on the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes. Both the AMD EPYC 9755 and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX are built by TSMC on a 4 nm process node.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD EPYC 9755 has higher memory bandwidth at 576.0 GB/s, compared to the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX’s 409.6 GB/s, due to its twelve-channel memory bus versus the Threadripper’s eight-channel bus.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The biggest win for the AMD EPYC 9755 is in PassMark physics, where it scores 27,806 against the Threadripper’s 16,860, a 64.9% advantage. This is the largest delta in the entire comparison. In PassMark find prime numbers, the EPYC scores 2,047 versus 1,476, a 38.7% lead. Data encryption shows a 37.9% lead (284,927 vs 206,662). Random string sorting is another major EPYC victory, with a 36.3% lead (571,185 vs 418,973). The EPYC also leads in integer math by 28.8% (1,549,946 vs 1,203,634) and floating-point math by 27.3% (922,900 vs 725,066). Extended instructions favor the EPYC by 12.1% (303,321 vs 270,647), and data compression by 21.3% (4,517,407 vs 3,723,652).

The biggest win for the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX is in PassMark single-thread, where it scores 4,542 against the EPYC’s 3,503, a 22.9% advantage. This is the only test with a double-digit delta in the Threadripper’s favor. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Threadripper scores 148,601 versus the EPYC’s 141,378, a 4.9% lead. The same 4.9% margin applies to all other Cinebench tests: R15 multi-core (14,978 vs 14,250), R15 single-core (2,114 vs 2,011), R20 multi-core (62,412 vs 59,378), R20 single-core (8,811 vs 8,382), and R23 single-core (20,979 vs 19,959). The PassMark multithread test is the closest contest, with the Threadripper winning 171,200 to 166,328, a 2.8% margin.

The data shows a clear pattern. The EPYC’s wins are all in compute-heavy areas that scale with its 32 additional cores. The Threadripper’s wins are in clock-speed-sensitive tests. The Cinebench multi-core results are notable: despite having 128 cores, the EPYC loses to the 96-core Threadripper in all three Cinebench multi-core tests. This suggests the Threadripper’s higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz and lower TDP of 350 W allow it to sustain performance in these specific workloads better than the EPYC’s 4.10 GHz boost clock. The EPYC’s wins in PassMark tests show that its core count and cache size are decisive in other types of parallel work.

Specification Differences

The AMD EPYC 9755 and AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX differ in several key specifications. The EPYC has 128 cores and 256 threads, while the Threadripper has 96 cores and 192 threads. The EPYC has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. The Threadripper has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The EPYC has a TDP of 500 W, while the Threadripper is rated at 350 W. The EPYC uses AMD Socket SP5, while the Threadripper uses AMD Socket sTR5.

The cache configuration differs. The EPYC has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 512 MB of shared L3 cache. The Threadripper has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 384 MB of L3 cache. The memory bus is twelve-channel on the EPYC versus eight-channel on the Threadripper, resulting in memory bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s versus 409.6 GB/s. The EPYC has 133,040 million transistors across 16 dies of 70.6 mm² each. The Threadripper has 99,780 million transistors across 12 dies of 70.6 mm² each.

The EPYC is from the EPYC 9005 series with the Turin codename, while the Threadripper is from the 9000 series with the Shimada Peak codename. The EPYC has a locked multiplier, while the Threadripper has an unlocked multiplier. The EPYC was released on 2024-10-09, and the Threadripper was released on 2025-07-22. Both have 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes and support ECC memory. The launch MSRP for the EPYC 9755 is $12984, and the launch MSRP for the Threadripper PRO 9995WX is $11700.