AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX vs Intel Xeon 6780E Comparison

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX and Intel Xeon 6780E are both 99th-percentile server/workstation processors, but they are built for entirely different jobs. The Threadripper PRO 9985WX takes 15 of 16 head-to-head benchmarks, while the Xeon 6780E wins only one. That single win, however, points to a specific strength that matters in certain enterprise workloads. The data shows a clear split: the AMD part dominates nearly every compute task, while the Intel part holds a niche in encryption throughput despite having far more cores.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX wins in every Cinebench test, all multithreaded PassMark tests, and most single-threaded workloads. Its biggest margins come in single-thread performance, where it scores 133.1% higher than the Xeon 6780E in PassMark single-thread (4482 vs 1923). It also leads in extended instructions by 97.7% (225340 vs 114008), showing a massive advantage in SIMD and vectorized code. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the AMD part scores 132859 against the Intel part’s 73723, a 80.2% lead. The Threadripper PRO 9985WX also wins integer math by 36% (872710 vs 641817), floating-point math by 27.5% (553348 vs 433862), and physics by 25.9% (13783 vs 10951). In data compression, the AMD part leads by 13.9% (2912972 vs 2557582), and in random string sorting the margin is narrow at 0.6% (329014 vs 326954).

The Intel Xeon 6780E wins exactly one benchmark: PassMark data encryption, scoring 193004 against the AMD part’s 154824, a 19.8% advantage. That is the only head-to-head test where Intel comes out on top. The Xeon 6780E also has more physical cores (144 vs 64) and threads (144 vs 128), but that core count does not translate into wins in any other benchmark. The AMD part’s higher boost clock (5.40 GHz vs 3.00 GHz) and larger L3 cache (256 MB vs 108 MB) drive most of its victories, particularly in single-thread and latency-sensitive tasks.

The Verdict

Pick the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX if your workload is general-purpose compute, rendering, physics simulation, integer or floating-point math, or any single-threaded application. It wins 15 of 16 benchmarks, and its average benchmark score of 320749 sits above its nearest rival (AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X at 321753, a -0.3% delta) and well above the Xeon 6780E’s 280438. The Threadripper PRO 9985WX is also closer to the top of its own rival list, with a 1.7% lead over the Intel Xeon 6781P (315524) and a 2.9% lead over the AMD EPYC 9575F (311774).

Pick the Intel Xeon 6780E if your primary task is data encryption, where it beats the AMD part by 19.8%. That is a real, measurable advantage. The Xeon 6780E also has more cores (144 vs 64) and threads (144 vs 128), which could matter for certain highly parallel workloads that are not captured in these benchmarks — but based on the data presented, those workloads do not show up in any of the 16 tests. The Xeon 6780E’s average benchmark score of 280438 is 12.6% lower than the AMD part’s 320749. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X (279778, a 0.2% delta) and the AMD EPYC 9565 (285471, a -1.8% delta), meaning it sits in a lower performance tier overall.

For most users, the Threadripper PRO 9985WX is the stronger choice. The Xeon 6780E is only preferable if encryption throughput is the dominant workload and you can accept losing every other benchmark.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The widest gap in the entire comparison is single-thread performance. In PassMark single-thread, the AMD part scores 4482 versus 1923 for the Intel part, a 133.1% lead. That is not a small margin; it means the Threadripper PRO 9985WX is more than twice as fast in single-threaded tasks. The same pattern appears in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the AMD part scores 1890 against 1049, another 80.2% lead.

In extended instructions, the AMD part scores 225340 versus 114008, a 97.7% advantage. This test typically reflects AVX-512 or similar vectorized workloads, and the Zen 5 architecture clearly handles them far better than Sierra Forest. The lead in find prime numbers is 60.7% (1138 vs 708), showing a strong integer performance advantage. Multithreaded performance shows a 73% lead in PassMark multithread (150071 vs 86734), and Cinebench R20 multicore shows a 80.2% lead (55800 vs 30963).

The data encryption win for the Intel part is the only bright spot. The Xeon 6780E scores 193004 versus 154824, a 19.8% advantage. This suggests that the Intel part’s architecture includes more efficient encryption accelerators or that its lower clock speed is offset by better crypto throughput per core. However, this single win does not compensate for the losses elsewhere. In data compression, the AMD part leads by 13.9% (2912972 vs 2557582), and in floating-point math by 27.5% (553348 vs 433862). The closest margin is random string sorting, where the AMD part wins by just 0.6% (329014 vs 326954), a near-tie.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher single-thread performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX wins PassMark single-thread by 133.1% (4482 vs 1923) and Cinebench R15 single-core by 80.2% (1890 vs 1049).

Q: Does the Intel Xeon 6780E win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins PassMark data encryption with a score of 193004 versus 154824 for the AMD part, a 19.8% advantage.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX has 64 cores and 128 threads. The Intel Xeon 6780E has 144 cores and 144 threads.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark score?

A: The AMD part has an average benchmark score of 320749, while the Intel part has 280438. The AMD part’s nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9980X at 321753, a -0.3% delta.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX boosts to 5.40 GHz, while the Intel Xeon 6780E boosts to 3.00 GHz.

Q: Are both processors in the 99th percentile?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX and the Intel Xeon 6780E are in the 99th percentile versus all CPUs.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX uses the Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with a codename of Shimada Peak. It is part of the 9000 series and the Ryzen Threadripper generation. The Intel Xeon 6780E uses the Sierra Forest architecture on a 5 nm Intel process, with the same codename of Sierra Forest, part of the Xeon 6 generation. The manufacturing processes differ: TSMC’s 4 nm versus Intel’s 5 nm, which contributes to the AMD part’s higher clock speeds.

The cache layouts are fundamentally different. The AMD part has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 256 MB of L3 cache. The Intel part has 96 KB of L1 per core, 4 MB of L2 per module, and 108 MB of shared L3. The AMD part’s L3 cache is more than double the Intel part’s, which helps explain its strong single-thread and multithread performance. The Intel part’s L2 cache is per module, not per core, which reflects its different core design.

The AMD part is built on an 8x 70.6 mm² die configuration with 66,520 million transistors. The Intel part has a single die size of 578 mm², with transistor count not listed. The AMD part’s smaller chiplets likely contribute to better yields and higher clocks, while the Intel part’s monolithic die is larger. Both support DDR5 memory with an eight-channel memory bus and 409.6 GB/s bandwidth, and both support ECC memory.

The AMD part has a PCIe Gen 5 interface with 128 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part has PCIe Gen 5 with 88 lanes (CPU only). This is a significant difference for expansion: the AMD part offers 40 more PCIe lanes, which matters for multi-GPU or high-density storage configurations. The AMD part also has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel part is locked, meaning the AMD part can be overclocked if the platform allows it.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ substantially: the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX has 64 cores and 128 threads, while the Intel Xeon 6780E has 144 cores and 144 threads. The Intel part has more than double the cores but no hyperthreading, while the AMD part uses simultaneous multithreading to reach 128 threads from 64 cores.

Clock speeds are a major differentiator. The AMD part has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 3.00 GHz. The AMD part’s boost clock is 2.40 GHz higher, which drives its single-thread dominance.

The TDP figures are close but not identical: the AMD part is rated at 350 W, while the Intel part is rated at 330 W. The sockets differ completely: the AMD part uses AMD Socket sTR5, while the Intel part uses Intel Socket 4710. The AMD part has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel part is locked. The launch MSRP for the AMD part is $7999, and for the Intel part it is $11350. The release dates differ as well: the AMD part was released on 2025-07-22, while the Intel part was released on 2024-06-02.

Memory support is identical in specification: both use DDR5, eight-channel memory, 409.6 GB/s bandwidth, and ECC support. Integrated graphics are N/A on both. The market segment for both is Server/Workstation, and both are in active production. The part numbers are 100-000000722 for the AMD part and SRPG3 for the Intel part.