Ryzen Threadripper 2950X vs EPYC 7551
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen Threadripper 2950X outperforms EPYC 7551 by a moderate 14% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing EPYC 7551 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 409 | 323 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.27 | 8.44 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD EPYC | AMD Ryzen Threadripper |
| Power efficiency | 8.59 | 9.75 |
| Architecture codename | Naples (2017−2018) | ZEN+ (2018−2019) |
| Release date | 29 June 2017 (7 years ago) | 13 August 2018 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $3,400 | $899 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ryzen Threadripper 2950X has 565% better value for money than EPYC 7551.
Detailed specifications
EPYC 7551 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) |
| Threads | 64 | 32 |
| Base clock speed | 2 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 4.4 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | 20 | 35 |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 64 MB (shared) | 32 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 12 nm |
| Die size | 192 mm2 | 213 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 4,800 million | 19,200 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 7551 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 2 (Multiprocessor) | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | TR4 | Socket TR4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 180 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7551 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7551 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7551 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Eight-channel | DDR4 Quad-channel |
| Maximum memory size | 2 TiB | 2 TiB |
| Max memory channels | 8 | 4 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 170.671 GB/s | 93.867 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | + | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7551 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 128 | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 16.34 | 18.55 |
| Recency | 29 June 2017 | 13 August 2018 |
| Physical cores | 32 | 16 |
| Threads | 64 | 32 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 12 nm |
EPYC 7551 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
Ryzen Threadripper 2950X, on the other hand, has a 13.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.
The Ryzen Threadripper 2950X is our recommended choice as it beats the EPYC 7551 in performance tests.
Be aware that EPYC 7551 is a server/workstation processor while Ryzen Threadripper 2950X is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7551 and Ryzen Threadripper 2950X, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
