AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X vs Intel Xeon 6781P Comparison

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X and Intel Xeon 6781P are both 99th-percentile flagship processors, but they achieve their status through fundamentally different designs. The AMD part, built on a 4 nm TSMC process with 64 Zen 5 cores, dominates the majority of application benchmarks, while the Intel Xeon, with 80 Granite Rapids cores on Intel’s 5 nm node, counters with a significant advantage in specific physics and prime-number workloads. The data shows a clear split: the Threadripper wins 12 of 14 head-to-head tests, yet the Xeon’s two victories are decisive enough to define its own use case.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X is the clear winner for general-purpose, multi-threaded compute. Its average benchmark score of 321,753 places it 2% ahead of the Intel Xeon 6781P’s 315,524, and it holds a 1.9% lead in the direct comparison. The Threadripper’s wins span rendering, data compression, encryption, and math workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 130,529 against the Xeon’s 100,254, a 30.2% margin. That advantage repeats across Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core, also at 30.2% deltas. For integer math, the Threadripper posts 872,071 versus 584,834, a massive 49.1% lead. Data encryption shows a 31.4% edge (157,137 vs. 119,623), and floating-point math is 10.2% ahead (559,003 vs. 507,406). Single-thread performance is also firmly in AMD’s court: the Threadripper scores 4,537 in PassMark single-thread tests, 43.9% higher than the Xeon’s 3,152.

The Intel Xeon 6781P wins where its sheer core count and architecture favor specific workloads. Its most notable victory is in PassMark physics, where it scores 17,753 against the Threadripper’s 8,001, a 54.9% advantage. The Xeon also dominates prime-number finding, scoring 1,687 versus 769, a 54.4% delta. These are not marginal wins; they are the largest margins in the entire head-to-head set. The Xeon’s 80 cores and 160 threads provide a structural advantage in these parallel integer tasks, even though its lower base clock of 2.00 GHz and boost of 3.80 GHz lag the Threadripper’s 3.20 GHz base and 5.40 GHz boost. For workloads that scale with raw core count and specific instruction patterns, the Xeon is the better choice.

The Verdict

The data dictates a straightforward verdict: pick the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X for virtually all mainstream workstation tasks, from rendering to data processing and encryption. Its 30.2% lead across all Cinebench multi-core tests and 49.1% lead in integer math make it the superior all-rounder. The Threadripper also benefits from a higher boost clock (5.40 GHz vs. 3.80 GHz) and a more efficient 4 nm process, which contributes to its single-thread dominance. The Xeon 6781P is the specialist’s choice. Its 54.9% physics win and 54.4% prime-number win are unmatched by the AMD part, making it the go-to for simulation, scientific computing, and any workload that relies heavily on those specific PassMark tests. The Xeon’s eight-channel memory bus and 409.6 GB/s bandwidth (versus the Threadripper’s quad-channel 204.8 GB/s) also suggest a platform designed for memory-hungry server tasks, though the benchmark data does not directly test this. For a desktop workstation, the Threadripper is the default recommendation. For a server or workstation dedicated to physics simulations or prime-number-intensive research, the Xeon’s wins are too large to ignore.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is the Cinebench trio. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Threadripper scores 13,157 against 10,105, a 30.2% delta. That exact percentage repeats in R20 (54,822 vs. 42,106) and R23 (130,529 vs. 100,254). This consistency suggests a fundamental throughput advantage, not a test-specific anomaly. The Threadripper’s 128 threads, running at up to 5.40 GHz, simply outpace the Xeon’s 160 threads capped at 3.80 GHz. The Xeon’s higher core count cannot compensate for the clock deficit in these rendering workloads.

PassMark’s integer math test shows the largest single delta: 872,071 for AMD versus 584,834 for Intel, a 49.1% margin. This is likely due to the Zen 5 architecture’s superior per-core integer execution, as the Threadripper’s 64 cores outperform the Xeon’s 80 cores despite the latter having 25% more cores. Similarly, single-thread performance is a one-sided affair: 4,537 vs. 3,152, a 43.9% lead. This makes the Threadripper better for lightly threaded applications and general responsiveness.

The Xeon’s wins are equally pronounced. In PassMark physics, the Xeon’s 17,753 is more than double the Threadripper’s 8,001, representing a -54.9% delta from AMD’s perspective. Prime-number finding follows the same pattern: 1,687 vs. 769, a -54.4% delta. These tests likely leverage the Xeon’s AVX-512-style instructions and larger L3 cache (336 MB shared vs. 256 MB) more effectively. The Xeon also wins in passmark_find_prime_numbers with a score of 1,687, which is 119.4% higher than AMD’s 769. This is not a close contest; it is a categorical win for Intel in these specific niches.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X scores 130,529, which is 30.2% higher than the Intel Xeon 6781P’s 100,254.

Q: Does the Intel Xeon 6781P win any benchmark?

A: Yes. The Xeon wins PassMark physics (17,753 vs. 8,001, a 54.9% delta) and PassMark find prime numbers (1,687 vs. 769, a 54.4% delta).

Q: How do the core counts and clock speeds compare?

A: The Intel Xeon 6781P has 80 cores and 160 threads, but its base clock is 2.00 GHz and boost is 3.80 GHz. The AMD Threadripper 9980X has 64 cores and 128 threads, with a base clock of 3.20 GHz and boost of 5.40 GHz.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two?

A: The Intel Xeon 6781P supports eight-channel DDR5 with a bandwidth of 409.6 GB/s, while the AMD Threadripper 9980X supports quad-channel DDR5 with a bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s.

Q: Which chip has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Xeon 6781P has 336 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD Threadripper 9980X has 256 MB of L3 cache.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each?

A: The AMD Threadripper 9980X has an average score of 321,753, which is 2% higher than the Intel Xeon 6781P’s 315,524.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on different processes and architectures. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X uses TSMC’s 4 nm process with 66,520 million transistors across an 8x 70.6 mm² die configuration. Its architecture is Zen 5, codenamed Shimada Peak, part of the Ryzen Threadripper 9000 series. The Intel Xeon 6781P uses Intel’s own 5 nm process, with a die size of 2x 598 mm², and is based on the Granite Rapids architecture, part of the Xeon 6 family. The process advantage for AMD (4 nm vs. 5 nm) likely contributes to its higher clock speeds.

Cache layouts differ significantly. The Threadripper provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 256 MB of L3. The Xeon offers 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and a larger 336 MB of shared L3. The Xeon’s larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, combined with its bigger L3, help it in cache-sensitive workloads like prime-number finding, where it wins decisively.

Memory support also diverges. Both support DDR5 and ECC memory, but the Xeon has an eight-channel memory bus with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth, double the Threadripper’s quad-channel 204.8 GB/s. PCIe connectivity also favors Intel, with 136 Gen 5 lanes versus AMD’s 80 Gen 5 lanes. The Threadripper has an unlocked multiplier, while the Xeon is locked. The Threadripper uses AMD Socket sTR5, while the Xeon uses Intel Socket 4710. Neither has integrated graphics. The launch MSRP for the AMD part is $4999, while the Intel part is $8960. The Xeon targets the server/workstation market segment, while the Threadripper is positioned for desktop, with the latter releasing on July 29, 2025, and the former on February 23, 2025.