AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX vs Intel Core i5-8500 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a starkly one-sided picture. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX wins 8 out of 8 recorded head-to-head comparisons, and in most cases the margin is not incremental, it is overwhelming. The most dramatic disparity appears in the Cinebench multi-core tests, where the Threadripper PRO 3975WX scores 53,295 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core against just 8,079 for the Intel Core i5-8500, a delta of 554.7%. That is not a close race; that is a different category of hardware entirely.

The same pattern repeats across the older Cinebench versions. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the AMD part records 22,215 versus 3,393, again a 554.7% advantage. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 5,331 against 814, a 554.9% lead. The consistency of these percentages across R15, R20, and R23 tells a clear story: the Threadripper's advantage in heavily threaded rendering workloads is stable and massive, regardless of the benchmark generation.

Single-core results are closer in percentage terms but still favor AMD decisively. The Threadripper PRO 3975WX posts 7,467 in Cinebench R23 single-core against 1,140 for the i5-8500, a 555% delta. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 3,136 versus 478, a 556.1% gap, and Cinebench R15 single-core lands at 752 versus 114, a 559.6% difference. These numbers are surprising at first glance, because the Intel part has a higher boost clock in some scenarios, but the recorded data is unambiguous.

Geekbench offers a slightly different picture. In Geekbench multi-core, the AMD chip scores 16,922 against 4,752, a 256.1% lead. That is still decisive, but the margin is roughly half of what Cinebench shows. More interesting is Geekbench single-core, where the Threadripper PRO 3975WX wins by just 17%, scoring 1,570 versus 1,342. This is the narrowest margin in the entire comparison and suggests that in lightly threaded, latency-sensitive workloads, the two processors are far closer than the core count disparity would imply.

For context on the AMD side, the database places the Threadripper PRO 3975WX at the 68th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 13,786. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core 3 304 at 13,745 (0.3% behind), the Intel Core i7-8750H at 13,868 (0.6% ahead), and the AMD EPYC 7443 at 13,936 (1.1% ahead). The Intel Core i5-8500 also sits at the 68th percentile, with an average score of 13,142, and its nearest rivals are the Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL at 13,061 (0.6% behind), the Intel Core i5-9400F at 13,041 (0.8% behind), and the Intel Core i7-7700K at 13,291 (1.1% ahead). Despite the enormous head-to-head deltas, both processors occupy the same percentile rank, which underscores how benchmark aggregation can obscure extreme workload-specific differences.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core rendering?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is dramatically faster. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 52,895 versus 8,079 for the Intel Core i5-8500, a 554.7% advantage. The same pattern holds in Cinebench R20 and R15, with leads of 554.7% and 554.9% respectively.

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-8500 competitive in single-core performance?

A: Not according to the recorded data. The Threadripper PRO 3975WX wins every single-core test, including a 17% lead in Geekbench single-core (1,570 versus 1,342). In Cinebench tests, the AMD lead is much larger, ranging from 555% to 559.6%.

Q: How do these processors compare to their closest rivals in the database?

A: The Threadripper PRO 3975WX has an average benchmark score of 13,786, placing it 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core 3 304 and 0.6% behind the Intel Core i7-8750H. The Core i5-8500 averages 13,142, sitting 0.8% behind the Intel Core i5-9400F and 0.9% behind the Intel Core i7-10750H.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-8500 win any benchmark category?

A: No. In the head-to-head comparison, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX wins all 8 recorded benchmarks. The Intel part does have additional PassMark results in the database, but none of them appear in the head-to-head set.

Q: What is the most significant performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gaps are in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the AMD chip leads by 559.6%, and Cinebench R15 multi-core, where it leads by 554.9%. The smallest gap is Geekbench single-core at 17%.

Q: Are both processors aimed at the same market segment?

A: No. The database lists both as Desktop parts, but the specifications suggest very different targets. The Threadripper PRO 3975WX is a 32-core, 64-thread workstation processor with eight-channel memory support, while the Core i5-8500 is a 6-core, 6-thread mainstream chip with dual-channel memory.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX uses the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Castle Peak, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 32 cores and 64 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz. The die is composed of four 74 mm² chiplets, totaling 15,200 million transistors. The cache layout is generous: 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a massive 128 MB of shared L3 cache.

The Intel Core i5-8500, by contrast, uses the Coffee Lake architecture on Intel's 14 nm process. It offers 6 cores and 6 threads, with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. The die size is 154 mm². Cache is far more modest: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 9 MB of shared L3. There is no transistor count listed for the Intel part in the database.

Memory support also diverges sharply. The Threadripper PRO 3975WX supports DDR4 across an eight-channel bus with a theoretical bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, and it supports ECC memory. The Core i5-8500 supports DDR4 on a dual-channel bus with 42.7 GB/s of bandwidth and no ECC support. The memory bandwidth difference alone, 204.8 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s, explains a substantial portion of the multi-core performance gap in memory-sensitive workloads.

PCIe connectivity is another differentiator. The AMD processor provides PCIe Gen 4 with 128 lanes from the CPU. The Intel part provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. For workstation use cases involving multiple GPUs or NVMe storage arrays, this is a fundamental architectural advantage for the AMD chip.

The AMD processor also has integrated graphics absent from its specification, while the Intel Core i5-8500 includes UHD Graphics 630. The production status differs as well: the Threadripper PRO 3975WX is listed as Active, while the Core i5-8500 is End-of-life.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion: these are not competing products. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is a 32-core workstation processor with eight-channel memory and 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, designed for sustained heavy multi-threaded workloads. The Intel Core i5-8500 is a 6-core mainstream desktop chip with dual-channel memory and 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, suited to everyday computing and light productivity.

Anyone whose workload is dominated by multi-core rendering, simulation, or content creation should choose the Threadripper PRO 3975WX without hesitation. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 52,895 versus 8,079 is a 554.7% advantage, and that gap persists across every multi-threaded benchmark in the database. The eight-channel memory subsystem and 128 MB of L3 cache provide the infrastructure to feed those 32 cores in ways the i5-8500 cannot match.

The Intel Core i5-8500 makes sense only in contexts where its smaller footprint, integrated graphics, and lower core count are acceptable. It is a capable processor for basic desktop use, and its Geekbench single-core score of 1,342 is respectable, but it trails the Threadripper PRO 3975WX by 17% even in that category. The i5-8500 also benefits from a long production history and a mature ecosystem, but the recorded performance data shows no scenario where it beats the AMD part.

Specification Differences

The specification table below highlights only the fields where the two processors differ.

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX | Intel Core i5-8500 |

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

| Cores | 32 | 6 |

| Threads | 64 | 6 |

| Base Clock | 3.50 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.20 GHz | 4.10 GHz |

| TDP | 280 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket WRX8 | Intel Socket 1151 |

| Architecture | Zen 2 | Coffee Lake |

| Codename | Castle Peak | Coffee Lake |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 4x 74 mm² | 154 mm² |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 128 MB | 9 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Eight-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | 42.7 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 128 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | None | UHD Graphics 630 |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2020-07-13 | 2018-02-13 |

| Launch MSRP | $2749 | $192 |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX wins every benchmark category where both processors were measured. Its largest advantages come in multi-core workloads, where the 32-core, 64-thread configuration produces deltas of 554.7% to 554.9% in Cinebench tests and 256.1% in Geekbench multi-core. The single-core wins are smaller in percentage terms, ranging from 17% in Geekbench to 559.6% in Cinebench R15, but they are still wins. For rendering, video encoding, scientific computing, virtualization, or any workload that scales with core count and memory bandwidth, the Threadripper PRO 3975WX is the clear choice.

The Intel Core i5-8500 wins no recorded head-to-head benchmarks. Its strengths are contextual rather than comparative: it has integrated graphics, a 65 W TDP versus 280 W, and a much simpler platform requirement with a dual-channel memory bus and 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. It is also an end-of-life product, which may matter for procurement decisions. For a user building a basic desktop system where the integrated GPU is sufficient and the workload is light, the i5-8500 is a functional option. But the benchmark data from the database shows no performance scenario where it outpaces the Threadripper PRO 3975WX.