AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920 vs Intel Xeon W-2175 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly along a single axis: the Intel Xeon W-2175 wins every recorded workload, while the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920 does not take a single victory across the six Cinebench tests tracked in the database. That is a decisive outcome, but the margins matter more than the raw win count when deciding which processor fits a given workload.

Starting with multi-threaded rendering, the Xeon W-2175 leads in every Cinebench iteration. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 2010 against 1890 for the Threadripper 1920, a 6.3% advantage. That margin expands slightly to 6.4% in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the Intel part records 8379 versus 7877. The largest absolute gap appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core: 19951 for the Xeon W-2175 versus 18756 for the Threadripper 1920, again a 6.4% difference. For users running long renders or heavily parallel simulations, the Intel processor consistently finishes ahead, and the percentage gap stays stable across all three multi-core tests.

Single-threaded performance tells a similar story, but with a notable twist. The Xeon W-2175 posts 283 in Cinebench R15 single-core, 1182 in R20 single-core, and 2816 in R23 single-core. The Threadripper 1920 trails at 266, 1111, and 2647 respectively. The delta is 6.4% in all three single-core tests, matching the multi-core margins almost exactly. That consistency suggests the Intel architecture holds a uniform per-clock advantage rather than a workload-specific edge. The Threadripper 1920 does have a higher base clock at 3.20 GHz versus 2.50 GHz, but the Xeon W-2175 boosts to 4.30 GHz against 3.80 GHz, and the benchmark results show the boost advantage outweighing the base-clock deficit.

Looking at the broader database context, the Xeon W-2175 sits in the 61st percentile among all CPUs, while the Threadripper 1920 lands at the 60th percentile. These are adjacent positions, but the average benchmark scores reveal the separation: the Intel part averages 5770 across all tracked tests, while the AMD part averages 5425. That is a 345-point gap, roughly 6.4% of the AMD score, which mirrors the head-to-head deltas. The nearest rivals for each processor also frame their respective competitive positions. The Xeon W-2175 trades blows with the Intel Xeon E-2388G (5805 average, -0.6% delta) and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X (5730 average, +0.7% delta). The Threadripper 1920 sits close to the Intel Xeon W-1290P (5443 average, -0.3% delta) and the AMD EPYC 7351P (5469 average, -0.8% delta).

The use-case split, then, is not about one processor winning some tasks and the other winning others. It is about the magnitude of the Intel lead and whether that lead matters for the target workload. In every Cinebench test, the Xeon W-2175 is ahead by roughly 6.3% to 6.4%. For a single render job, that difference is modest. For continuous batch rendering or repeated multi-threaded builds, the cumulative time savings become meaningful.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Xeon W-2175 is the faster processor across every benchmark recorded in the database. It wins all six head-to-head tests, with deltas ranging from 6.3% to 6.4%. No workload category in the tracked suite favors the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920. Users who prioritize raw Cinebench performance, whether single-threaded or multi-threaded, should select the Intel part.

That said, the Threadripper 1920 is not a distant second. Its scores trail by a consistent margin, but it remains within 6.4% across the board. The average benchmark score of 5425 places it in the same general performance tier as the Xeon W-2175's 5770, and its percentile ranking (60th versus 61st) is essentially identical. The Threadripper 1920 also offers features the Xeon W-2175 lacks: an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, 60 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (versus 48), and a larger 32 MB L3 cache. For a user who values those attributes over the small benchmark deficit, the AMD part remains a defensible choice.

The database does not record any test where the Threadripper 1920 wins. Therefore, the verdict for performance seekers is clear: the Xeon W-2175 delivers higher scores in every measured scenario. The verdict for feature seekers is more nuanced: the Threadripper 1920 brings overclocking support and more PCIe lanes, but those advantages do not translate into Cinebench victories. The Intel part also supports ECC memory, which the AMD part does not, making it the more appropriate option for workstation reliability requirements.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The six head-to-head results form a remarkably uniform pattern. The Intel Xeon W-2175 wins every test, and the delta is nearly constant. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Intel score of 2010 beats the AMD score of 1890 by 6.3%. That is the smallest margin of the six tests. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Intel score of 283 beats 266 by 6.4%. Every subsequent test, from R20 multi-core (8379 versus 7877) to R20 single-core (1182 versus 1111), to R23 multi-core (19951 versus 18756), to R23 single-core (2816 versus 2647), repeats that 6.4% gap.

The consistency across test generations is worth emphasizing. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 each scale the workload differently, yet the relative performance between these two processors does not budge. That suggests the difference is rooted in fundamental architectural efficiency rather than any specific instruction set advantage or cache behavior that might appear in only one test version. The Xeon W-2175's higher boost clock (4.30 GHz versus 3.80 GHz) likely explains much of the single-threaded lead. The multi-threaded lead, meanwhile, comes from the Intel part's additional two cores and four threads (14 cores/28 threads versus 12 cores/24 threads), combined with that same per-core efficiency advantage.

The largest absolute point difference occurs in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Intel part leads by 1195 points. That is the test that best represents sustained all-core workloads, and it is where the Xeon W-2175's core count advantage shows most clearly. In contrast, the smallest absolute difference is 17 points in Cinebench R15 single-core, a test that barely differentiates between the two processors. Even so, the percentage delta remains consistent, meaning the Intel advantage scales proportionally with workload size.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmarks in the head-to-head comparison?

A: The Intel Xeon W-2175 wins all six recorded head-to-head tests. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920 wins zero.

Q: How large is the performance gap between the two processors?

A: The Intel Xeon W-2175 leads by 6.3% in Cinebench R15 multi-core and by 6.4% in every other test: R15 single-core, R20 multi-core, R20 single-core, R23 multi-core, and R23 single-core.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920 have any advantages in the benchmark data?

A: No, the database shows no benchmark where the Threadripper 1920 scores higher. Its average benchmark score is 5425, while the Xeon W-2175 averages 5770.

Q: How do these processors rank among all CPUs in the database?

A: The Xeon W-2175 is in the 61st percentile, and the Threadripper 1920 is in the 60th percentile. Their percentile ranks are nearly identical despite the consistent benchmark gap.

Q: What are the nearest competitors for each processor?

A: The Xeon W-2175's closest rivals are the Intel Xeon E-2388G (5805 average, -0.6% delta) and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X (5730 average, +0.7% delta). The Threadripper 1920's closest rivals are the Intel Xeon W-1290P (5443 average, -0.3% delta) and the AMD EPYC 7351P (5469 average, -0.8% delta).

Q: Does the Threadripper 1920 support ECC memory?

A: No, the database lists ECC memory support as false for the Threadripper 1920. The Xeon W-2175 supports ECC memory.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Xeon W-2175 uses the Skylake-W architecture on a 14 nm process node, fabricated by Intel. Its die size is 484 mm². The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920 uses the Zen architecture (codename Whitehaven) on a 14 nm process node, fabricated by GlobalFoundries. Its die is composed of two 213 mm² chiplets, totaling 426 mm², with 9,600 million transistors.

The core layouts differ significantly. The Xeon W-2175 packs 14 cores and 28 threads, with 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core. Its L3 cache is 19.25 MB shared across all cores. The Threadripper 1920 offers 12 cores and 24 threads, with a larger 96 KB L1 cache per core but a smaller 512 KB L2 cache per core. Its L3 cache is 32 MB, notably larger than the Intel part's shared pool.

Memory support is similar on paper but differs in ECC capability. Both processors use DDR4 memory with a quad-channel bus and an identical 85.3 GB/s memory bandwidth. However, the Xeon W-2175 supports ECC memory, while the Threadripper 1920 does not. The market segments also differ: the Intel part targets Server/Workstation, while the AMD part is classified as Desktop.

PCIe connectivity favors the AMD processor. The Threadripper 1920 provides 60 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only), while the Xeon W-2175 provides 48 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. Both use the same PCIe generation, so the difference is purely in lane count, which matters for systems with multiple GPUs or high-speed storage devices. The Threadripper 1920 also has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, whereas the Xeon W-2175's multiplier is locked.

Specification Differences

The core count is the most obvious difference: the Xeon W-2175 has 14 cores and 28 threads, while the Threadripper 1920 has 12 cores and 24 threads. Clock speeds also diverge. The Intel part runs at a 2.50 GHz base clock and boosts to 4.30 GHz. The AMD part runs at a 3.20 GHz base clock and boosts to 3.80 GHz. The higher base clock on the AMD side does not compensate for the lower boost clock in the benchmark results.

Both processors share a 140 W TDP, so power consumption is not a differentiator. The sockets differ: Intel Socket 2066 for the Xeon W-2175, AMD Socket SP3r2 for the Threadripper 1920. The process nodes are the same at 14 nm, but the foundries differ (Intel versus GlobalFoundries). The Intel part has a single 484 mm² die, while the AMD part uses two 213 mm² chiplets.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The Xeon W-2175 has 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, with 19.25 MB shared L3. The Threadripper 1920 has 96 KB L1 and 512 KB L2 per core, with 32 MB L3. The AMD part has more total L3 but less L2 per core. Memory bandwidth is identical at 85.3 GB/s, and both support quad-channel DDR4. ECC support goes only to the Intel part.

The Threadripper 1920 has an unlocked multiplier, while the Xeon W-2175 is locked. The AMD part offers 60 PCIe Gen 3 lanes versus 48 on the Intel part. Market positioning also differs: Server/Workstation for Intel, Desktop for AMD. The Intel processor has a recorded launch MSRP of $1947, while the AMD part has no recorded launch MSRP. Production status is end-of-life for both, and the Intel part has a release date of October 2017, while the AMD part has no recorded release date.