AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX vs Intel Xeon 6980P Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear split: the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX wins 11 of the 17 recorded comparisons, while the Intel Xeon 6980P takes 6. The magnitude of those wins tells a more nuanced story than the raw win count.

The Threadripper PRO 9975WX dominates every Cinebench test by exactly 32.5%. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 93,553 against the Xeon's 63,175. The single-core gap is identical in percentage terms: 13,207 versus 8,918. This consistency across R15, R20, and R23, both single and multicore, indicates a fundamental architectural advantage in per-thread throughput rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The most decisive AMD victory comes in PassMark's single-thread test, where the Threadripper PRO 9975WX records 4,408 versus the Xeon's 1,681, a 61.9% advantage. Physics simulation also heavily favors AMD: 7,288 versus 3,350, a 54% lead. The PassMark multithread score shows a 29.1% AMD win, 104,902 against 74,324.

Intel's wins are concentrated in throughput-heavy workloads where its 128 cores can flex. The largest margin is in floating point math: 501,720 versus 304,833, a 64.6% advantage. Extended instructions follow at 55.9% (214,794 versus 137,733). Data encryption shows a 47.3% lead (125,246 versus 85,035). Data compression comes in at 43.8% (2,364,519 versus 1,644,573). Integer math favors Intel by 38.1% (637,476 versus 461,724), and random string sorting by 28.1% (240,792 versus 188,014).

Notably, the prime number search test is the closest overall, with AMD winning by just 10.5% (620 versus 555). This suggests that neither architecture has a decisive edge in this particular workload, and the result falls within a range where other factors such as cache behavior may be more influential than raw core count or clock speed.

Architecture Differences

The two processors approach high-core-count computing from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Xeon 6980P uses Granite Rapids architecture on Intel's 5 nm process, while the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX uses Zen 5 on TSMC's 4 nm node. The process difference alone does not explain the benchmark gaps, but it sets the stage for other contrasts.

Core counts diverge sharply: the Xeon packs 128 cores and 256 threads, while the Threadripper PRO offers 32 cores and 64 threads. This 4x core difference explains why Intel wins in parallel throughput tests, but it also exposes the per-core performance gap. The Xeon's base clock is 2.00 GHz with a 3.90 GHz boost, while the Threadripper PRO runs at 4.00 GHz base and 5.40 GHz boost. Higher clocks per core drive AMD's single-thread dominance.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The Xeon provides 112 KB L1 and 2 MB L2 per core, with 504 MB of shared L3 cache. The Threadripper PRO offers 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, with 128 MB of L3. Despite having less total cache, AMD's smaller per-core footprint combined with higher clocks appears sufficient for its single-thread wins. The Xeon's massive L3 pool, over 3.9x larger than AMD's, likely contributes to its data-heavy workload victories.

Memory architecture also diverges. The Xeon uses twelve-channel DDR5 with 614.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the Threadripper PRO uses eight-channel DDR5 with 409.6 GB/s. The Xeon's 50% bandwidth advantage aligns with its wins in compression and encryption, which are memory-bound. PCIe lane counts reverse the trend: Intel provides 96 Gen 5 lanes, while AMD provides 128 Gen 5 lanes, a 33% advantage for AMD.

Physical design differs as well. The Xeon uses a 3x 598 mm² die configuration, while the Threadripper PRO uses 4x 70.6 mm² chiplets. AMD lists 33,260 million transistors; Intel does not specify a transistor count in the database. The Xeon draws 500 W TDP versus AMD's 350 W, a significant power disparity that reflects the core count difference. Both support ECC memory and lack integrated graphics.

FAQ

Q: Why does the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX win so many benchmarks despite having far fewer cores?

A: The Threadripper PRO 9975WX runs at much higher clock speeds: 4.00 GHz base and 5.40 GHz boost, compared to the Xeon's 2.00 GHz base and 3.90 GHz boost. This clock advantage drives the consistent 32.5% lead across all Cinebench tests and the 61.9% lead in PassMark single-thread performance. Higher clocks per core enable faster completion of lightly threaded tasks.

Q: How does the Intel Xeon 6980P manage to win any benchmarks with lower clock speeds?

A: The Xeon's 128 cores and 256 threads provide massive parallelism. In PassMark floating point math, it scores 501,720 versus 304,833, a 64.6% advantage. The twelve-channel memory system with 614.4 GB/s bandwidth also helps in memory-intensive tasks like data compression, where it leads by 43.8%.

Q: Which processor has better memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Xeon 6980P has 614.4 GB/s from its twelve-channel DDR5 memory bus. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX has 409.6 GB/s from its eight-channel DDR5 bus. The Xeon's 50% bandwidth advantage correlates with its wins in data compression and encryption.

Q: What is the difference in PCIe connectivity?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX provides 128 Gen 5 PCIe lanes, while the Intel Xeon 6980P provides 96 Gen 5 lanes. The Threadripper PRO offers 33% more PCIe lanes, which can matter for systems with many expansion cards or NVMe drives.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel Xeon 6980P does not. This makes the AMD processor more flexible for users who want to adjust clock speeds beyond factory settings.

Q: How do the two processors compare in cache size?

A: The Intel Xeon 6980P has 504 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX has 128 MB. However, the Xeon has 2 MB L2 per core versus AMD's 1 MB per core, and 112 KB L1 per core versus 64 KB. The Xeon's larger cache pool supports its wins in data-heavy workloads.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon 6980P | AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX |

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

| Cores | 128 | 32 |

| Threads | 256 | 64 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 4.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.90 GHz | 5.40 GHz |

| TDP | 500 W | 350 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 7529 | AMD Socket sTR5 |

| Architecture | Granite Rapids | Zen 5 |

| Codename | Granite Rapids | Shimada Peak |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 4 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die Size | 3x 598 mm² | 4x 70.6 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 112 KB per core | 64 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB per core | 1 MB per core |

| L3 Cache | 504 MB shared | 128 MB |

| Memory Bus | Twelve-channel | Eight-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 614.4 GB/s | 409.6 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 96 lanes | Gen 5, 128 lanes |

| Transistors | Not specified | 33,260 million |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Release Date | 2024-09-23 | 2025-07-22 |

| Launch MSRP | $12460 | $4099 |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon 6980P wins in six recorded benchmarks, all in PassMark's compute-heavy categories. Floating point math (64.6% lead), extended instructions (55.9%), data encryption (47.3%), data compression (43.8%), integer math (38.1%), and random string sorting (28.1%) are Intel's territory. These workloads benefit from the Xeon's 128 cores and its 504 MB L3 cache. The twelve-channel memory system with 614.4 GB/s bandwidth provides the data throughput these tasks demand. This processor suits environments where massive parallel data processing is the primary job, such as database operations, cryptographic workloads, and large-scale number crunching that can scale across hundreds of threads.

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX wins in eleven benchmarks. Its territory includes all Cinebench tests (32.5% lead across the board), PassMark single-thread (61.9% lead), physics simulation (54% lead), multithread (29.1% lead), and prime number search (10.5% lead). The higher clock speeds, 4.00 GHz base and 5.40 GHz boost, drive these wins. The unlocked multiplier adds flexibility for users who want to push performance further. This processor suits workstation tasks that mix single-threaded responsiveness with moderate parallel throughput, such as interactive 3D rendering, simulation, and software development where compile times matter but per-core speed is critical.

The Verdict

The benchmark data supports a straightforward choice based on workload profile. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WX is the better general-purpose workstation processor. It wins 11 of 17 tests, including every Cinebench benchmark, and its single-thread lead of 61.9% is the largest margin in any test. The 32.5% advantage across all Cinebench tests indicates that even in multicore rendering, AMD's 32 cores with high clocks outperform Intel's 128 cores with lower clocks. For users running typical workstation applications, which often cannot perfectly scale across 128 cores, the Threadripper PRO 9975WX delivers superior real-world performance. Its 350 W TDP and unlocked multiplier also make it more manageable in a workstation chassis.

The Intel Xeon 6980P is the specialist's tool. It wins in six PassMark workloads, with leads ranging from 28.1% to 64.6%. These wins concentrate in exactly the types of throughput-bound tasks that justify a 128-core processor: floating point math, encryption, compression, and integer operations. The 504 MB L3 cache and 614.4 GB/s memory bandwidth provide the data staging needed to keep 256 threads busy. For server deployments running virtualized workloads, batch processing, or scientific computing that scales linearly across many cores, the Xeon's advantages are significant. The 99th percentile ranking versus all CPUs, compared to AMD's 98th, reflects Intel's higher overall average benchmark score of 251,516 against AMD's 182,700.

The choice depends on whether the workload is dominated by per-core performance or by total parallel throughput. The Threadripper PRO 9975WX excels where clock speed and single-thread agility matter. The Xeon 6980P excels where core count and cache capacity dominate. The database shows a clear tradeoff: AMD wins the majority of tests, but Intel wins the majority of the throughput-heavy ones by wide margins. Users who need maximum performance in the specific workloads where Intel leads should choose the Xeon; all others will find the Threadripper PRO 9975WX to be the stronger overall performer.