AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX vs Intel Core i7-8750H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data paints a stark picture of performance disparity. Across every single benchmark recorded, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX claims victory. The Intel Core i7-8750H fails to secure a single win in any of the eight head-to-head comparisons. The margin of victory, however, varies dramatically depending on the workload.

In multi-core rendering tests, the Threadripper's dominance is overwhelming. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD chip scores 52,895 points against Intel's 8,274, a delta of -84.4% for the i7-8750H. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the Threadripper's 22,215 dwarfs the i7's 3,475. Even in Cinebench R15 multi-core, the older test, the Threadripper's 5,331 score crushes the i7's 834. The AMD part is delivering roughly six times the multi-threaded performance, a gulf that reflects the 32-core versus 6-core configuration.

Single-core performance tells a more nuanced story, though the AMD processor still wins decisively. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Threadripper scores 7,467 versus the i7's 1,168, again a -84.4% delta. Geekbench single-core shows a narrower gap: the AMD part scores 1,570 against Intel's 1,309, a delta of -16.6%. This is the closest contest in the entire dataset, suggesting that per-core efficiency differences are less extreme than core-count differences. Still, the Threadripper's higher base and boost clocks (3.50 GHz and 4.20 GHz versus 2.20 GHz and 4.10 GHz) help it edge ahead even in lightly threaded tasks.

The intermediate tests reinforce the trend. Geekbench multi-core shows the Threadripper at 16,922 versus 4,978 for the i7, a -70.6% delta. Cinebench R20 single-core gives the AMD chip 3,136 points against 490, and Cinebench R15 single-core gives it 752 versus 117. The consistency is striking: no matter the benchmark generation or the threading level, the Threadripper PRO 3975WX outperforms the Core i7-8750H. The question is not whether one is faster, but by how much, and in which specific workloads the gap narrows to something resembling a contest.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is the superior processor in every measured benchmark. For multi-threaded workloads like 3D rendering, video encoding, or scientific computing, the Threadripper's 32 cores and 64 threads deliver performance that the 6-core, 12-thread Intel part cannot approach. Cinebench R23 multi-core results show a 52,895 to 8,274 score, meaning the AMD chip completes rendering tasks roughly 6.4 times faster. This is not a close competition; it is a categorical difference in capability.

For users prioritizing single-thread performance, the gap narrows but still favors AMD. Geekbench single-core shows the Threadripper leading by 16.6%, a meaningful margin but far less dramatic than the multi-core gap. The Intel Core i7-8750H might still serve in workloads that are poorly optimized for many cores, but the data does not show a single scenario where it wins outright. The Threadripper also benefits from a higher percentile ranking among all CPUs, though both sit at 68, indicating they are statistically similar in overall standing relative to the full CPU landscape.

The practical verdict depends on use case. The Threadripper PRO 3975WX is the clear choice for professionals running heavily parallel workloads—those who need maximum throughput and have the desktop platform to support its 280W TDP. The Intel Core i7-8750H, with its 45W TDP and mobile BGA 1440 socket, is a laptop part designed for portability and battery life, not extreme performance. The data suggests it trades raw power for mobility, but in a head-to-head benchmark comparison, it loses every contest.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies, and the architectural distinction explains much of the performance gap. The Intel Core i7-8750H is built on Intel's 14 nm process and uses the Coffee Lake architecture (specifically Coffee Lake-H). It is a monolithic die with a size of 149 mm². The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX, by contrast, uses TSMC's 7 nm process and the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Castle Peak. It is a chiplet design, consisting of four dies, each measuring 74 mm², totaling roughly 296 mm² of silicon. The Threadripper also packs 15,200 million transistors, a figure not listed for the Intel part.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core, but the L2 cache per core is 512 KB on the AMD chip versus 256 KB on the Intel. L3 cache shows the biggest divergence: the Threadripper has 128 MB total, while the i7 has 12 MB shared. This 10x difference in L3 capacity is critical for workloads that repeatedly access large datasets, as it reduces the need to fetch data from system memory.

The process node advantage (7 nm versus 14 nm) allows AMD to pack more transistors and cores into the same thermal envelope, though the Threadripper's 280W TDP is much higher than the i7's 45W. The foundry also differs—Intel fabricates its own chip, while TSMC manufactures the AMD part. The Threadripper's memory controller supports eight-channel DDR4 with a memory bandwidth of 204.8 GB/s, while the i7-8750H's memory bus is not specified in the data. The AMD chip also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the Intel part.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal a clear division in market intent. The Intel Core i7-8750H is a mobile processor, listed with a market segment of "Mobile" and a socket of Intel BGA 1440. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is a desktop part using AMD Socket WRX8. The core counts diverge sharply: Intel has 6 cores and 12 threads, while AMD has 32 cores and 64 threads. Base clocks are 2.20 GHz for Intel and 3.50 GHz for AMD; boost clocks are 4.10 GHz versus 4.20 GHz, respectively.

The TDP difference is substantial—45W for the Intel part versus 280W for the AMD. This reflects the thermal design targets: the i7 is built for laptops with limited cooling, while the Threadripper assumes a desktop chassis with robust cooling solutions. The Intel part includes integrated graphics (UHD 630), while the AMD chip has none. Process nodes are 14 nm (Intel) and 7 nm (TSMC). The AMD chip supports 128 PCIe Gen 4 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part's PCIe support is not listed.

Memory support differs in channel configuration: the Threadripper uses eight-channel memory, while the i7's memory bus is unspecified. The Intel chip has a die size of 149 mm²; the AMD chip uses four dies of 74 mm² each. Release dates are separated by over two years: the i7-8750H launched in April 2018, and the Threadripper PRO 3975WX in July 2020. The Intel part is marked as end-of-life, while the AMD chip is still active in production. The Threadripper has a launch MSRP of $2749, while the Intel part has no listed MSRP. The Intel chip is not multiplier unlocked, and neither is the AMD part.

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 i7-8750H has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: How much faster is the Threadripper in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Threadripper scores 52,895 versus 8,274 for the i7-8750H, a delta of -84.4% for the Intel part.

Q: Does the Intel i7-8750H win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The data shows 0 wins for the Intel part and 8 wins for the AMD Threadripper across all eight recorded benchmark tests.

Q: What is the difference in single-core Geekbench scores?

A: The Threadripper scores 1,570, and the i7-8750H scores 1,309, giving AMD a 16.6% lead.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The AMD Threadripper PRO 3975WX supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core i7-8750H does not.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The Intel Core i7-8750H has a TDP of 45W, and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX has a TDP of 280W.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX wins everywhere in the benchmark data. It dominates multi-core tests, with Cinebench R23 multi-core showing a 52,895 to 8,274 lead, and Cinebench R20 multi-core showing 22,215 versus 3,475. For users running video rendering, 3D modeling, scientific simulations, or any workload that scales with core count, the Threadripper is the only choice based on these numbers. Its 128 MB of L3 cache and eight-channel memory bandwidth (204.8 GB/s) further support memory-intensive tasks.

The Intel Core i7-8750H, despite losing all benchmarks, has a niche defined by its form factor and power draw. Its 45W TDP and mobile socket make it suitable for laptops, where the Threadripper's 280W TDP and desktop-only design are impossible to accommodate. For users who need portable computing with reasonable performance, the i7-8750H offers a way to run multi-threaded applications, though at a fraction of the speed. Its integrated UHD 630 graphics also eliminate the need for a discrete GPU in basic display tasks. The data does not show a performance scenario where the Intel part wins, but its existence in the mobile segment is the only context where it makes sense.

In single-threaded tasks, the Threadripper still leads, but the margin shrinks. Geekbench single-core shows a 16.6% difference, and Cinebench R23 single-core shows a larger gap at -84.4%. The Threadripper's higher boost clock (4.20 GHz versus 4.10 GHz) and newer Zen 2 architecture give it the edge. For users who prioritize raw per-core speed over core count, the Threadripper remains superior, though the gap is less punishing than in multi-core tests. Ultimately, the Threadripper PRO 3975WX is the definitive winner in this comparison, with the i7-8750H serving only as a lower-power, mobile alternative that cannot match its performance in any measured metric.