AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX vs Intel Core i7-10750H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are unambiguous: AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX wins all eight head-to-head comparisons, with the Intel Core i7-10750H recording zero wins. The most lopsided margins appear in multi-threaded workloads. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Threadripper scores 52895 against the Intel part's 9718, a deficit of 81.6 percent. The same 81.6 percent delta repeats across Cinebench R15 and R20 multicore tests, where scores of 5331 versus 979 and 22215 versus 4081 respectively show the gap is consistent across rendering generations.

Single-core performance tells a different story in absolute terms, but the winner remains the same. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Threadripper posts 7467 while the Core i7-10750H manages 1372, again an 81.6 percent difference. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 3136 versus 576, and R15 shows 752 versus 138. These deltas are identical in percentage terms, which suggests the architectural lead is proportional across both low and high thread counts in Cinebench workloads.

Geekbench results narrow the gap considerably. In Geekbench multicore, the AMD part scores 16922 versus 5574 for Intel, a 67.1 percent advantage. In Geekbench single-core, the margin shrinks to 9.7 percent, with 1570 against 1417. This single-core Geekbench result is the closest the Intel chip comes to matching its rival, and it highlights that the Threadripper's advantage in lightly threaded general-purpose tasks is far smaller than in rendering or heavily threaded compute.

The pattern across all tests is that the Threadripper PRO 3975WX leads by roughly 80 percent in Cinebench, about 67 percent in Geekbench multicore, and under 10 percent in Geekbench single-core. The Intel part's best showing is in single-threaded Geekbench, where it trails by less than double digits. Every other test shows a massive performance chasm, driven primarily by core count and memory bandwidth rather than clock speed alone.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i7-10750H is a Comet Lake-H mobile part built on Intel's 14 nm process, with six cores and twelve threads. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is a Castle Peak desktop workstation chip built on TSMC's 7 nm process, with 32 cores and 64 threads. The process node difference alone, 14 nm versus 7 nm, explains part of the efficiency and density gap, though the Threadripper's 280 W TDP versus the Intel part's 45 W TDP shows that AMD is spending far more power to achieve its performance.

Cache hierarchies diverge sharply. The Intel chip has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The AMD chip also has 64 KB of L1 per core but doubles L2 to 512 KB per core, and its L3 is 128 MB, more than ten times the Intel total. The Threadripper's larger per-core L2 and massive L3 pool directly support its 32-core design, reducing cross-core data traffic and improving scaling in cache-sensitive workloads.

Memory architecture is another major split. The Intel part uses dual-channel DDR4 with 46.9 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Threadripper uses eight-channel DDR4 with 204.8 GB/s. That is over four times the memory bandwidth, which matters enormously for multi-core rendering and data-heavy tasks. The AMD part also supports ECC memory, which the Intel mobile chip does not. PCIe connectivity differs as well: Intel offers Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes, while AMD provides Gen 4 with 128 CPU lanes, a massive expansion for workstation I/O.

The Threadripper is built from four chiplets, each 74 mm², totaling 15,200 million transistors. The Intel part is a monolithic die with no disclosed transistor count or die size. The Threadripper also has no integrated graphics, while the Intel chip includes UHD Graphics. The manufacturing foundry differs: TSMC produces the AMD chip, Intel produces its own. Release dates are close, with Intel launching in April 2020 and AMD in July 2020, but the design targets are clearly distinct segments.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX wins everywhere in the recorded benchmarks, so the question becomes which workloads benefit most from its dominance. The largest advantages appear in Cinebench multicore tests, where the Threadripper's 32 cores and 64 threads produce scores roughly five times higher than the Intel part. This makes it the clear choice for video rendering, 3D animation, and any task that scales across many cores. The 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth and 128 MB L3 cache amplify this advantage in scenarios where data sets exceed the Intel chip's 12 MB L3 and 46.9 GB/s bandwidth.

The Threadripper also wins single-core Cinebench by the same 81.6 percent margin, which is surprising given its lower boost clock of 4.20 GHz versus Intel's 5.00 GHz. This indicates that the Zen 2 architecture delivers more instructions per clock at similar or lower frequencies. For users running lightly threaded rendering tasks, the AMD part still leads, though by a margin that is proportionally identical to its multi-core lead in Cinebench.

The Intel Core i7-10750H's closest contest is Geekbench single-core, where it trails by only 9.7 percent. This suggests that for everyday desktop applications, web browsing, office work, and light productivity, the Intel chip is nearly competitive. Its 5.00 GHz boost clock and lower power draw make it suitable for mobile workstations where battery life and thermals matter. The 45 W TDP versus 280 W TDP means the Intel part can operate in thin laptops, while the Threadripper requires a desktop workstation with robust cooling and power delivery.

For users with workloads that cannot scale beyond a few threads, such as legacy software or single-threaded scripting, the Intel chip's deficit is modest. But for any professional rendering, simulation, or data processing task that can use 64 threads, the Threadripper's advantage is overwhelming. The data shows no scenario in the recorded benchmarks where the Intel part wins, so the decision hinges on portability and power budget versus absolute throughput.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX has 32 cores and 64 threads, while the Intel Core i7-10750H has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The Threadripper scores 52895, and the Intel part scores 9718, a difference of 81.6 percent in favor of the AMD chip.

Q: Is the Intel chip competitive in any benchmark?

A: Yes, in Geekbench single-core the Intel part scores 1417 against 1570 for the Threadripper, a gap of only 9.7 percent. This is the closest result in the recorded data.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Intel chip has 46.9 GB/s with dual-channel DDR4, while the Threadripper has 204.8 GB/s with eight-channel DDR4.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i7-10750H does not.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The Intel Core i7-10750H has a TDP of 45 W, and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX has a TDP of 280 W.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-10750H | AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX |

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

| Cores | 6 | 32 |

| Threads | 12 | 64 |

| Base Clock | 2.60 GHz | 3.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 280 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1440 | AMD Socket WRX8 |

| Architecture | Comet Lake | Zen 2 |

| Codename | Comet Lake-H | Castle Peak |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 7 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not disclosed | 15,200 million |

| Die Size | Not disclosed | 4x 74 mm² |

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

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 128 MB |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 46.9 GB/s | 204.8 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

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

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics | None |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | April 2020 | July 2020 |

| Launch MSRP | Not disclosed | $2749 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | No |

The specification table captures the fundamental divide: a six-core mobile chip designed for 45 W operation versus a 32-core workstation processor with eight-channel memory and 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes. The Threadripper's 7 nm process, 128 MB L3 cache, and ECC support position it for professional compute environments, while the Intel part's integrated graphics and low TDP suit it for portable systems. The benchmark data reinforces that these are not direct competitors; they serve different segments, and the AMD part dominates the recorded performance tests without exception.