CPU Comparison

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X and Intel Xeon D-2733NT are both 8-core, 16-thread processors, but they target completely different environments. The Threadripper is a desktop part with a 180W TDP and an unlocked multiplier, while the Xeon D is a server/workstation chip soldered to the board with an 80W TDP. Benchmark results show the AMD chip wins every single head-to-head test, but the margins are slim, and the Xeon’s feature set tells a different story for specific workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The data is unambiguous: the Ryzen Threadripper 1900X wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons. In Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both multi-core and single-core tests favor the AMD part, with deltas ranging from 3.7% to 4.1%. The Threadripper’s advantage is consistent across rendering workloads, which suggests a general performance lead rather than a niche strength. If your priority is raw compute throughput in Cinebench-style applications, the AMD chip is the clear choice.

The Intel Xeon D-2733NT does not win a single benchmark in this comparison. However, its strengths lie outside of raw Cinebench scores. It supports ECC memory, which the Threadripper does not, and it uses a PCIe Gen 4 interface with 32 lanes, while the AMD part uses PCIe Gen 3 with 60 lanes. The Xeon’s 80W TDP is less than half of the Threadripper’s 180W, making it a far more power-efficient option for dense server deployments where thermal and power budgets are tight. The Xeon also comes with a newer release date, hitting the market in 2022 versus the Threadripper’s 2017 launch.

Architecture Differences

These two chips come from different eras and design philosophies. The Threadripper 1900X is built on AMD’s Zen architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It uses a dual-die design with a total die size of 2x 213 mm² and incorporates 9,600 million transistors. The cache layout is per-core: 96 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core, with a large 32 MB L3 pool shared across the chip.

The Xeon D-2733NT is based on Intel’s Ice Lake architecture, specifically the Ice Lake-D variant, and is manufactured on Intel’s 10 nm process. Intel does not disclose transistor counts or die size for this part. Its cache structure differs significantly: 80 KB of L1 per core, a much larger 1.25 MB of L2 per core, but only 15 MB of shared L3. This trade-off, more L2 per core but less total L3, reflects a server-oriented design where per-core latency matters more than a massive shared pool.

Memory support is identical in width: both use DDR4 in a quad-channel configuration with a theoretical bandwidth of 85.3 GB/s. The Threadripper does not support ECC memory, while the Xeon does. PCIe connectivity is a major divergence: the AMD chip offers 60 Gen 3 lanes, while the Intel part offers 32 Gen 4 lanes. The Xeon is also socketed differently, Intel BGA 2579 (soldered) versus AMD Socket SP3r2, and the Intel part has a locked multiplier, whereas the Threadripper is fully unlocked for overclocking.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is that the Threadripper 1900X beats the Xeon D-2733NT in every test, but the margins are remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD chip scores 1440 against the Intel’s 1388, a 3.7% advantage. The single-core R15 test shows a 4.1% lead (203 vs 195), which is the largest delta of the entire comparison.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the Threadripper scores 6000 in multi-core versus 5785 for the Xeon, again a 3.7% difference. Single-core R20 shows 846 versus 816, also 3.7%. In Cinebench R23, the pattern holds: 14286 versus 13775 for multi-core (3.7% delta) and 2016 versus 1944 for single-core (3.7% delta).

The consistency of these deltas is notable. It suggests that the Threadripper’s advantage is not workload-specific but rather a general clock-speed and IPC lead. The AMD chip runs at a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost of 4.00 GHz, compared to the Xeon’s 2.10 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost. The higher clocks, combined with the older but capable Zen architecture, are enough to edge out the Ice Lake part in every Cinebench iteration. However, the Xeon’s lower clock speeds are likely a deliberate choice to fit within its 80W thermal envelope.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher multi-core performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X scores 14286, which is 3.7% higher than the Intel Xeon D-2733NT’s 13775.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon D-2733NT support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon D-2733NT supports ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X does not support ECC memory.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-core performance?

A: The Threadripper 1900X leads in every single-core test. In Cinebench R15 it scores 203 versus 195 (4.1% delta), in R20 it scores 846 versus 816 (3.7%), and in R23 it scores 2016 versus 1944 (3.7%).

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X has a TDP of 180W, while the Intel Xeon D-2733NT has a TDP of 80W.

Q: What is the difference in PCIe support?

A: The AMD chip provides 60 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, while the Intel chip provides 32 PCIe Gen 4 lanes.

Q: Which processor was released more recently?

A: The Intel Xeon D-2733NT was released on 2022-02-23, while the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X was released on 2017-08-30.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X | Intel Xeon D-2733NT |

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

| Architecture | Zen | Ice Lake |

| Codename | Zen (Whitehaven) | Ice Lake-D |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Intel |

| Base Clock | 3.80 GHz | 2.10 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.00 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| TDP | 180W | 80W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3r2 | Intel BGA 2579 |

| L1 Cache (per core) | 96 KB | 80 KB |

| L2 Cache (per core) | 512 KB | 1.25 MB |

| L3 Cache | 32 MB | 15 MB (shared) |

| ECC Memory Support | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 60 Lanes | Gen 4, 32 Lanes |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | 2017-08-30 | 2022-02-23 |

| Launch MSRP | $549 | None |

The Verdict

The benchmark data is clear: the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X outperforms the Intel Xeon D-2733NT in every Cinebench test, with a consistent 3.7% to 4.1% lead. The Threadripper’s higher base and boost clocks (3.80/4.00 GHz versus 2.10/3.20 GHz) drive this advantage, and its unlocked multiplier allows for further tuning that the locked Xeon cannot match. For any workload measured by Cinebench, multi-threaded rendering or single-threaded responsiveness, the AMD part is the better performer.

However, the Xeon D-2733NT is not without merit. It consumes 100W less power (80W vs 180W), which is a massive difference in a server rack. It supports ECC memory, a critical feature for data integrity in server environments. Its PCIe Gen 4 interface, while offering fewer lanes (32 vs 60), provides double the bandwidth per lane compared to Gen 3, which can be more efficient for high-speed storage and networking. The Xeon’s 15 MB of shared L3 is smaller than the Threadripper’s 32 MB, but its larger 1.25 MB per-core L2 cache may benefit latency-sensitive workloads.

Choose the Threadripper 1900X if you need raw Cinebench performance, a desktop form factor, and the flexibility of overclocking. Its 57th percentile ranking among all CPUs and average benchmark score of 4073 are slightly ahead of the Xeon’s 3984, and it matches its nearest rivals like the Intel Core i5-12500TE (delta -0.3%) and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700X (delta -1%). Choose the Xeon D-2733NT for a power-efficient, ECC-capable server platform where PCIe Gen 4 connectivity and lower thermals outweigh a modest performance deficit. Its benchmark scores place it in the same 57th percentile, with its closest rival being the Intel Xeon E-2336 (0% delta).