AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX Comparison

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX dominates the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 across every recorded benchmark, with the largest gaps appearing in multi-threaded and cache-sensitive workloads. The Threadripper posts an average benchmark score of 101041 against 40048 for the AI 9 365, a 152% advantage, and holds a 97th percentile ranking versus the 87th percentile for the mobile chip. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy, but the two processors serve entirely different market segments, making direct competition less meaningful than the raw numbers suggest.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core Cinebench R23 score?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX scores 8399 in Cinebench R23 single-core, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 scores 1992. The Threadripper leads by 76.3% in this test.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two CPUs?

A: The Threadripper PRO 9955WX records an average benchmark score of 101041, while the AI 9 365 records 40048. The Threadripper's nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 7513, scores 102244, putting it 1.2% ahead of the Threadripper.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Threadripper PRO 9955WX supports ECC memory, while the AI 9 365 does not. The Threadripper also uses eight-channel memory, compared to dual-channel for the AI 9 365.

Q: How do the two chips compare in Passmark multithread performance?

A: The Threadripper PRO 9955WX scores 67035 in Passmark multithread, while the AI 9 365 scores 29467. The Threadripper is 56% ahead in this workload.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 includes Radeon 880M integrated graphics, while the Threadripper PRO 9955WX has no integrated graphics (N/A).

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the Threadripper PRO 9955WX?

A: The launch MSRP is $1649. The AI 9 365 has no launch MSRP recorded in the database.

Architecture Differences

Both processors use the Zen 5 architecture and are fabricated on TSMC's 4nm process, but they diverge sharply in almost every other structural detail. The AI 9 365 uses the Strix Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI 300 generation, while the Threadripper PRO 9955WX uses the Shimada Peak codename and sits in the 9000 series, with the database listing its generation as Ryzen Threadripper (Zen 4 (Storm Peak)) despite the Zen 5 architecture label.

The core counts establish the fundamental divide: the AI 9 365 has 10 cores and 20 threads, while the Threadripper PRO 9955WX has 16 cores and 32 threads. The Threadripper also operates at far higher clock speeds, with a base clock of 4.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, compared to 2.00 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost for the AI 9 365. This clock advantage compounds with the core advantage in multi-threaded workloads.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The AI 9 365 provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of L3 cache. The Threadripper PRO 9955WX provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of L3 cache. The Threadripper's 4x larger L3 pool directly benefits workloads that repeatedly access large datasets.

The memory subsystem amplifies the gap. The AI 9 365 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Threadripper PRO 9955WX supports DDR5 over an eight-channel bus with 409.6 GB/s of bandwidth, a 4.6x increase in theoretical memory throughput. The Threadripper also supports ECC memory, which the AI 9 365 lacks.

PCIe connectivity shows a similar divergence. The AI 9 365 offers Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Threadripper PRO 9955WX offers Gen 5 with 128 lanes (CPU only). This makes the Threadripper suitable for multi-GPU and high-bandwidth storage configurations that the mobile chip cannot accommodate.

The physical packages differ as well. The AI 9 365 uses AMD Socket FP8 and has a die size of 233 mm². The Threadripper PRO 9955WX uses AMD Socket sTR5 and has a die size of 2x 70.6 mm², with 16,630 million transistors. The Threadripper's TDP is 350 watts versus 28 watts for the AI 9 365, reflecting its desktop-oriented power delivery. The Threadripper also has an unlocked multiplier, while the AI 9 365 does not.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Threadripper PRO 9955WX wins all 15 recorded head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The smallest margin appears in Passmark single-thread tests, where the Threadripper scores 4530 against 3841 for the AI 9 365, a 15.2% advantage. This indicates that even in lightly threaded workloads, the Threadripper's higher boost clock and architecture implementation deliver a measurable lead.

The largest margin appears in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Threadripper scores 8399 versus 1992 for the AI 9 365, a 76.3% gap. This is unusual because single-core tests typically minimize core-count advantages, but the Threadripper's 5.40 GHz boost clock and the AI 9 365's mobile-oriented power envelope explain the result. The same pattern appears in Cinebench R15 single-core, with the Threadripper at 846 and the AI 9 365 at 303, a 64.2% difference.

Multi-core workloads show consistent leads in the 50-70% range. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Threadripper scores 59494 against 18698, a 68.6% advantage. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 5996 versus 2842, a 52.6% gap. The Passmark suite mirrors this: multithread scores are 67035 versus 29467 (56% lead), integer math is 236120 versus 101831 (56.9% lead), and floating point math is 156215 versus 62802 (59.8% lead).

Cache and memory-sensitive tests reveal the Threadripper's strongest advantages. Passmark data compression shows 920954 versus 354510, a 61.5% gap. Random string sorting shows 99813 versus 39447, a 60.5% gap. Data encryption shows 44389 versus 18297, a 58.8% gap. Extended instructions show 76363 versus 25113, a 67.1% gap. The Threadripper also leads in find prime numbers (337 versus 117, 65.3% gap) and physics (4156 versus 1704, 59% gap).

The database records 15 wins for the Threadripper and 0 wins for the AI 9 365. No benchmark in the dataset favors the mobile chip.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in every specification field recorded in the database except for manufacturer, architecture, process node, foundry, and L2 cache per core. The core count differs by 6 cores, the thread count by 12 threads, and the base clock by 2.50 GHz in favor of the Threadripper. The boost clock differs by 0.40 GHz in favor of the Threadripper.

TDP differs by 322 watts, with the Threadripper at 350 watts and the AI 9 365 at 28 watts. Socket types differ entirely: FP8 versus sTR5. The AI 9 365 uses the Strix Point codename, while the Threadripper uses Shimada Peak. The generation field lists Ryzen AI 300 for the AI 9 365 and Ryzen Threadripper for the Threadripper.

Cache configurations differ in L1 per core (80 KB versus 64 KB) and L3 total (16 MB versus 64 MB). Memory support differs in type (DDR5/LPDDR5X versus DDR5), channel count (dual versus eight), bandwidth (89.6 GB/s versus 409.6 GB/s), and ECC support (false versus true). PCIe differs in generation (Gen 4 versus Gen 5) and lane count (16 versus 128). The AI 9 365 has integrated Radeon 880M graphics; the Threadripper has none.

Market segment, release date, multiplier unlock, part number, and die size all differ. The AI 9 365 released on 2024-06-30, while the Threadripper released on 2025-07-22. The AI 9 365 has a 233 mm² die; the Threadripper has 2x 70.6 mm² dies and 16,630 million transistors.

Where Each One Wins

The Threadripper PRO 9955WX wins every benchmark category in the database, so its strengths are comprehensive. The largest leads appear in Cinebench R23 single-core (76.3% ahead) and multi-core (68.6% ahead), making it the clear choice for rendering, simulation, and any workload that scales with core count and memory bandwidth. Its 64 MB L3 cache and eight-channel memory subsystem give it a decisive edge in data compression, encryption, and random string sorting, where the recorded gaps range from 58.8% to 61.5%.

The AI 9 365 wins no benchmark comparisons, but its profile suggests specific use cases. Its 28-watt TDP and integrated Radeon 880M graphics make it suitable for mobile systems where power draw and space are limited. The dual-channel memory and Gen 4 PCIe lanes are adequate for typical portable workloads. The 87th percentile ranking indicates it still outperforms the majority of CPUs in the database, just not the Threadripper.

The Threadripper's 97th percentile ranking places it among the top processors in the database, with nearest rivals including the AMD EPYC 7513 (1.2% ahead) and the AMD EPYC 4585PX (1.7% behind). The AI 9 365's nearest rivals are all mainstream parts: the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 (0.1% behind), Intel Core 5 221E (0.2% behind), AMD Ryzen 9 270 (0.5% behind), and Intel Core i9-13905H (0.7% behind). This confirms that the AI 9 365 competes in a different performance tier entirely.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports one conclusion: the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX is the superior processor by every measured metric. It wins 15 of 15 head-to-head benchmarks, with margins ranging from 15.2% in single-thread tests to 76.3% in Cinebench R23 single-core. Its average benchmark score of 101041 is 152% higher than the AI 9 365's 40048, and its 97th percentile ranking versus 87th percentile confirms its position at the top of the database.

The AI 9 365 remains a competitive mobile processor when judged against its actual peers. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 7700, sits only 0.1% ahead in average score, and the Intel Core i9-13905H trails by 0.7%. For users requiring a low-power processor with integrated graphics and a small physical footprint, the AI 9 365 provides a reasonable balance of capability and efficiency.

The Threadripper PRO 9955WX, however, targets a different class of workloads entirely. Its 16 cores, 32 threads, 64 MB L3 cache, eight-channel memory, and 128 PCIe Gen 5 lanes make it a workstation or server-class part. The 350-watt TDP and absence of integrated graphics signal that it is designed for systems where performance takes priority over power efficiency. The data shows no scenario in the recorded benchmarks where the AI 9 365 outperforms the Threadripper, so the choice depends entirely on whether the user needs the mobile chip's portability or the Threadripper's raw throughput.