Xeon w9-3575X vs Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS
2023
8 cores / 16 threads, 35 Watt
18.06
Xeon w9-3575X
2024
44 cores / 88 threads, 340 Watt
52.74
+192%

Xeon w9-3575X outperforms Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS by a whopping 192% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS and Xeon w9-3575X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking34530
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data33.64
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesAMD Phoenix (Zen 4, Ryzen 7040)no data
Power efficiency47.9314.41
Architecture codenamePhoenix-HS (Zen 4) (2023)Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024)
Release date13 June 2023 (1 year ago)24 August 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$3,789

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS and Xeon w9-3575X 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)44
Threads1688
Base clock speed4 GHz2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed5.2 GHz4.8 GHz
L1 cache512 KB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache8 MB2 MB (per core)
L3 cache16 MB97.5 MB
Chip lithography4 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size178 mm24x 477 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data79 °C
64 bit support++
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS and Xeon w9-3575X 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 configurationno data1
SocketFP7/FP8FCLGA4677
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt340 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS and Xeon w9-3575X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSX-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS and Xeon w9-3575X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
SGXno data-
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS and Xeon w9-3575X are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS and Xeon w9-3575X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR5-4800
Maximum memory sizeno data4 TB
Max memory channelsno data8
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon 780MN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS and Xeon w9-3575X.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data112

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.

Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 18.06
Xeon w9-3575X 52.74
+192%

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.

Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 28144
Xeon w9-3575X 82207
+192%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.06 52.74
Recency 13 June 2023 24 August 2024
Physical cores 8 44
Threads 16 88
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 340 Watt

Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS has 871.4% lower power consumption.

Xeon w9-3575X, on the other hand, has a 192% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 450% more physical cores and 450% more threads.

The Xeon w9-3575X is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS in performance tests.

Be aware that Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS is a notebook processor while Xeon w9-3575X is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS and Xeon w9-3575X, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS
Intel Xeon w9-3575X
Xeon w9-3575X

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.4 45 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Xeon w9-3575X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS or Xeon w9-3575X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.