AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX vs Intel Core i5-9400F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a complete sweep for the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX across all eight recorded head-to-head tests. The Intel Core i5-9400F does not claim a single victory, with the AMD processor winning 8 out of 8 comparisons. The magnitude of the AMD advantage varies dramatically by workload type, revealing a processor that dominates in both heavily threaded and lightly threaded scenarios.

In multi-core rendering tests, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX establishes overwhelming leads. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD scores 5331 against the Intel's 810, a delta of 558.1%. The Cinebench R20 multi-core test shows a similar pattern: AMD scores 22215 versus Intel's 3376, representing a 558% advantage. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result continues the trend, with AMD at 52895 and Intel at 8040, a 557.9% delta. These results reflect the massive core-count disparity between the two processors, as the AMD part fields 32 cores and 64 threads, while the Intel offers only 6 cores and 6 threads.

The single-core results are equally one-sided, albeit with slightly different deltas. In Cinebench R15 single-core, AMD scores 752 versus Intel's 114, a 559.6% difference. Cinebench R20 single-core shows AMD at 3136 and Intel at 476, a 558.8% delta. Cinebench R23 single-core records AMD at 7467 and Intel at 1135, a 557.9% gap. These single-threaded tests typically favor higher clock speeds, but the AMD's boost clock of 4.20 GHz against Intel's 4.10 GHz, combined with the Zen 2 architecture's efficiency, gives it a commanding edge even with only one core active.

Geekbench results offer a slightly different picture. In Geekbench multi-core, AMD scores 16922 versus Intel's 5106, a 231.4% delta. This is a smaller relative gap than the Cinebench multi-core tests, but still represents a massive performance advantage. The Geekbench single-core test is the closest comparison in the entire dataset: AMD scores 1570 versus Intel's 1344, a 16.8% delta. This is the only sub-100% delta in the head-to-head results, and it indicates that in lightly threaded, memory-latency-sensitive workloads, the Intel part is relatively more competitive, though still behind.

The average benchmark scores in the database place the AMD at 13786 and the Intel at 13041. The AMD's nearest rivals include the Intel Core 3 304 (delta 0.3%), the Intel Core i7-8750H (delta -0.6%), the AMD EPYC 7443 (delta -1.1%), and the Intel Core 5 120UL (delta 1.4%). The Intel Core i5-9400F's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-10750H (delta 0.1%), the Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL (delta -0.1%), the Intel Core i5-8500 (delta -0.8%), and the Intel Core i3-1210U (delta 1.9%). Both processors sit at the 68th percentile among all CPUs in the database, placing them in similar overall standing despite the enormous raw performance gap, which suggests the percentile metric accounts for the very different market positions of these two desktop parts.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core, and by how much?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX wins decisively, scoring 52895 versus the Intel Core i5-9400F's 8040. That is a 557.9% advantage, reflecting the AMD's 32 cores and 64 threads versus the Intel's 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: Is the single-core performance gap as large as the multi-core gap?

A: No. In Geekbench single-core, the AMD leads by only 16.8%, scoring 1570 against the Intel's 1344. However, in Cinebench R15 single-core, the delta jumps to 559.6%, with AMD at 752 and Intel at 114, showing that the gap varies heavily by benchmark methodology.

Q: What do the average benchmark scores indicate about overall performance?

A: The database records an average score of 13786 for the AMD and 13041 for the Intel. This places the AMD slightly ahead overall, but its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-8750H at a -0.6% delta, meaning the AMD's average is comparable to that mobile chip. The Intel's average is closest to the Intel Core i5-8500, which sits at a -0.8% delta.

Q: How does the AMD processor compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX has an average score 0.3% above the Intel Core 3 304, 1.4% above the Intel Core 5 120UL, 0.6% below the Intel Core i7-8750H, and 1.1% below the AMD EPYC 7443. These are all marginal differences, indicating that the AMD's average score is tightly clustered with these other parts.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-9400F win any recorded benchmark?

A: No. The head-to-head dataset shows 8 wins for the AMD and 0 wins for the Intel. Every test, from Cinebench R15 to Geekbench, records a higher score for the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX.

Q: What is the production status of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is listed as active in production, with a release date of July 13, 2020. The Intel Core i5-9400F is marked as end-of-life, with a release date of January 7, 2019.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX outperforms the Intel Core i5-9400F in every recorded benchmark. For workloads that scale with core count, such as Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD's 52895 score against the Intel's 8040 is a 557.9% landslide. For single-threaded tasks, the AMD still leads, as shown in Geekbench single-core where it scores 1570 versus 1344, a 16.8% edge. The Intel's only area of relative strength is that same Geekbench single-core test, where the delta is far smaller than in other benchmarks, but it still does not win.

Users should choose the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX if they require maximum multi-threaded throughput, given its 32 cores, 64 threads, and 128 MB of L3 cache. The database shows it is 558% ahead in Cinebench R20 multi-core and 231.4% ahead in Geekbench multi-core. The Intel Core i5-9400F, with its 6 cores and 6 threads, is suited for scenarios where the workload is light and the user prioritizes a lower TDP of 65 watts against the AMD's 280 watts. However, the benchmark results offer no scenario where the Intel part records a faster score, so the AMD is the clear performance pick. The Intel is end-of-life, while the AMD remains active, and the AMD carries a launch MSRP of $2749.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the Intel Core i5-9400F has 6 cores and 6 threads. The AMD's base clock is 3.50 GHz with a boost clock of 4.20 GHz, compared to the Intel's base clock of 2.90 GHz and boost clock of 4.10 GHz. The AMD has a TDP of 280 watts, while the Intel has a TDP of 65 watts.

The cache configurations diverge substantially. The AMD has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 128 MB of L3 cache. The Intel has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 9 MB of shared L3 cache.

Memory support also differs. The AMD supports DDR4 memory over an eight-channel bus with a memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s and supports ECC memory. The Intel supports DDR4 over a dual-channel bus with a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s and does not support ECC memory.

PCI Express connectivity is another differentiator. The AMD provides PCIe Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The sockets are incompatible: the AMD uses AMD Socket WRX8, and the Intel uses Intel Socket 1151.

The AMD has a larger process node advantage, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC with 15,200 million transistors and a die size of 4x 74 mm². The Intel is fabricated on a 14 nm process at Intel, with no transistor count or die size recorded in the database. Neither processor includes integrated graphics.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is built on the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Castle Peak, and belongs to the Ryzen Threadripper generation. The Intel Core i5-9400F uses the Coffee Lake architecture, specifically the Coffee Lake Refresh generation. The AMD is manufactured on a 7 nm process by TSMC, while the Intel uses a 14 nm process by Intel.

The core design philosophies differ sharply. The AMD's Zen 2 architecture employs a chiplet-based design, as indicated by its 4x 74 mm² die size and 15,200 million transistors. This allows for a massive 32-core, 64-thread configuration with a large 128 MB L3 cache. The Intel's Coffee Lake architecture is a monolithic design on 14 nm, with a smaller 6-core, 6-thread configuration and a 9 MB shared L3 cache.

The memory architecture reflects the workstation versus mainstream desktop positioning. The AMD uses an eight-channel DDR4 memory bus with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support, which is typical for professional workloads requiring high memory throughput and data integrity. The Intel uses a dual-channel DDR4 bus with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support, which is standard for consumer desktop platforms.

The PCIe implementation also highlights the gap. The AMD supports PCIe Gen 4 with 128 lanes, enabling high-bandwidth expansion for multiple GPUs or accelerators. The Intel supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, which is sufficient for a single GPU but far more limited for multi-device configurations. The production status also separates them: the AMD is active, while the Intel is end-of-life. The AMD's release date is July 13, 2020, while the Intel's is January 7, 2019. Both processors have locked multipliers, according to the database.