AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX vs Intel Xeon 6737P Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison between the Intel Xeon 6737P and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX shows a clear split in workload character. The Intel part wins 11 of the 16 head-to-head tests, while the AMD part takes 5. The margins, however, tell a more nuanced story than the raw win count.

In the Cinebench suite, the Xeon 6737P is consistently ahead by nearly identical margins. Across R15, R20, and R23 multicore tests, the Intel processor leads by 5.7% in every case. The single-core Cinebench results mirror this: R15 single-core shows a 5.8% lead, while R20 single-core shows a 5.7% lead. This consistency suggests a fundamental architectural efficiency advantage in the Intel part for rendering workloads, not a clock-speed fluke.

The Passmark suite reveals where each processor dominates. The most dramatic gap appears in Passmark Physics, where the Xeon 6737P scores 9362 against the Threadripper's 4360, a massive 114.7% advantage. This result indicates that the Intel architecture handles physics simulation workloads with far greater efficiency. Similarly, Passmark Find Prime Numbers shows a 59.1% lead for Intel (697 versus 438), and floating-point math favors Intel by 27.9% (258811 versus 202363). Extended instruction performance also goes to Intel by 27.3% (105453 versus 82850).

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX counters with strong wins in specific memory and integer workloads. Data encryption is the largest AMD victory at 18.4% (80453 versus 65615). Data compression follows with a 10.6% lead (1293784 versus 1157255). Integer math favors AMD by 8.2% (360156 versus 330756). Single-thread Passmark results also go to AMD, with a 8.3% advantage in both Passmark Single Thread and Passmark Singlethread tests (3323 versus 3048).

The overall average benchmark score reflects this split. The Xeon 6737P averages 140694 across all recorded tests, while the Threadripper averages 124171. The Intel part sits at the 98th percentile of all CPUs in the database, compared to the AMD part's 97th percentile. In the nearest rival comparison, the Xeon 6737P trails the Intel Xeon 674X by only 1.7% in average score, sits 1.9% behind the Xeon 6732P, 2.1% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 9965X3D, and 2.5% behind the Xeon w9-3575X. The Threadripper PRO 5975WX, by contrast, is essentially tied with the AMD EPYC 7642 (0.1% ahead), 0.5% behind the Xeon 6730P, 2.1% behind the EPYC 9354, and 3.1% ahead of the EPYC 9384X.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench multicore tests?

A: The Intel Xeon 6737P wins all three Cinebench multicore tests by 5.7%. Scores are 6822 in R15, 28428 in R20, and 67688 in R23, versus 6453, 26888, and 64021 for the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX.

Q: Where does the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX show its biggest advantage?

A: The largest AMD win is in Passmark Data Encryption, where it scores 80453 versus Intel's 65615, a difference of 18.4%. It also wins data compression by 10.6% and integer math by 8.2%.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-threaded performance?

A: Results are mixed. In Cinebench single-core tests, the Intel Xeon 6737P leads by 5.8% in R15 (963 versus 910) and 5.7% in R20 (4013 versus 3795). However, in Passmark Single Thread, the AMD part leads by 8.3% (3323 versus 3048).

Q: What is the most lopsided benchmark result between the two?

A: Passmark Physics is the most one-sided test. The Intel Xeon 6737P scores 9362, while the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX scores 4360, giving Intel a 114.7% advantage.

Q: Which processor has the higher overall average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Xeon 6737P has an average benchmark score of 140694, compared to 124171 for the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX. The Intel part also ranks at the 98th percentile of all CPUs, versus the 97th percentile for AMD.

Q: Does the AMD processor win any Passmark tests?

A: Yes. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX wins Passmark Data Compression, Data Encryption, Integer Math, and both Single Thread tests. Its wins are concentrated in integer, compression, and encryption workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon 6737P is the clear choice for rendering and physics-heavy workloads. Its Cinebench sweep across all versions, combined with the 114.7% lead in Passmark Physics and 59.1% lead in prime number finding, makes it the stronger part for 3D rendering, simulation, and scientific computing. The 27.9% advantage in floating-point math reinforces this positioning, as does the 27.3% lead in extended instruction throughput. The 5.7% multicore lead in every Cinebench iteration suggests that the Intel architecture scales more efficiently across its 32 cores in heavily parallel rendering tasks.

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX takes the crown for data-centric and single-threaded workloads. Its 18.4% encryption advantage and 10.6% compression advantage make it the better option for database workloads, file compression pipelines, and cryptography. The 8.2% integer math lead further supports this profile. The 8.3% single-thread Passmark advantage indicates that the AMD part handles lightly threaded applications with more responsiveness, which matters for interactive workstation use.

For mixed workloads, the overall average benchmark score favors the Intel part by roughly 13%. The Xeon 6737P's 98th percentile ranking versus AMD's 97th percentile is a small but meaningful gap. However, the AMD part's wins are not trivial: data encryption and compression are common server tasks, and a double-digit percentage advantage in those areas can translate to real throughput gains in storage and network environments.

Specification Differences

The two processors share the same core and thread counts, both at 32 cores and 64 threads. Both are active production parts with ECC memory support and locked multipliers. The market segment for both is Server/Workstation.

Clock speeds differ notably. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The Intel Xeon 6737P runs at 2.90 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost. The AMD part is 700 MHz faster at base and 500 MHz faster at boost.

Power envelopes are close but not identical. The Intel part has a TDP of 270, while the AMD part has a TDP of 280, a 10-point difference that favors Intel's efficiency. The launch MSRP for the Intel Xeon 6737P is $4995, while the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX launched at $3299.

Memory support diverges completely. The Intel part uses DDR5 with an eight-channel bus and 409.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The AMD part uses DDR4 with an eight-channel bus and 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth, exactly half the Intel figure.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Intel Xeon 6737P provides Gen 5 with 88 lanes (CPU only). The AMD part provides Gen 4 with 128 lanes (CPU only). The AMD part has more lanes, but they are one generation older.

The Intel part has no integrated graphics, while the AMD part's integrated graphics field is null. Release dates are far apart: the Intel Xeon 6737P launched on 2025-02-23, while the AMD part launched on 2022-03-07.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is substantial. The Intel Xeon 6737P uses Granite Rapids architecture, belonging to the Xeon 6 (Granite Rapids-SP) generation. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX uses Zen 3 architecture from the Chagall PRO codename, part of the Ryzen Threadripper 5000 series.

Process nodes differ by two generations. The Intel part is built on a 5 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The AMD part uses TSMC's 7 nm process. The Intel die is 598 mm², while the AMD part uses four 81 mm² dies, totaling 324 mm². The AMD part has 16,600 million transistors, while the Intel part's transistor count is not recorded.

Cache layouts are fundamentally different. The Intel Xeon 6737P has 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and a 144 MB shared L3 cache. The AMD part has 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a 128 MB L3 cache. The Intel part has more cache at every level, with its L3 advantage being 16 MB. The Intel part also has a larger L1 per core by 48 KB and a larger L2 per core by 1.5 MB.

The memory architecture reflects the generation gap. DDR5 support on Intel versus DDR4 on AMD explains the 204.8 GB/s bandwidth difference. The Intel part's 409.6 GB/s is double the AMD figure, which matters for memory-bound workloads.

The Intel part uses Intel Socket 4710, while the AMD part uses AMD Socket WRX8. Intel's part number is SRVNZ, and AMD's is 100-000000445. The Intel architecture is newer by roughly three years of release timing, and it delivers its performance with a slightly lower TDP despite the newer and larger process node.