Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950X

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
2017
16 cores / 32 threads, 180 Watt
17.71
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS
2023
8 cores / 16 threads, 35 Watt
18.06
+2%

Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 1950X by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking359345
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.82no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD Ryzen ThreadripperAMD Phoenix (Zen 4, Ryzen 7040)
Power efficiency9.1447.93
Architecture codenameZen (2017−2020)Phoenix-HS (Zen 4) (2023)
Release date13 July 2017 (7 years ago)13 June 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$999no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 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 cores16 (Hexadeca-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads3216
Base clock speed3.4 GHz4 GHz
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz5.2 GHz
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier34no data
L1 cache1.5 MB512 KB
L2 cache8 MB8 MB
L3 cache32 MB16 MB
Chip lithography14 nm4 nm
Die size213 mm2178 mm2
Maximum core temperature68 °C100 °C
Number of transistors9600 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)no data
SocketSP3r2FP7/FP8
Power consumption (TDP)180 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsSSE4.2, SSE4A, AMD-V, AES, AVX2, FMA3, SHAno data
AES-NI+-
AVX+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Quad-channelno data
Maximum memory size2 TiBno data
Max memory channels4no data
Maximum memory bandwidth85.33 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card-AMD Radeon 780M

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes60no 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.

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 17.71
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 18.06
+2%

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 Threadripper 1950X 27603
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 28144
+2%

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.

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 1187
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 2298
+93.6%

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.

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 8080
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 10848
+34.3%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 2997
+27%
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 2360

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 159
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 275
+73%

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 11237
+12.8%
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 9959

Blender(-)

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 163
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 214
+31.3%

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 1029
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 1956
+90.1%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 17.71 18.06
Recency 13 July 2017 13 June 2023
Physical cores 16 8
Threads 32 16
Chip lithography 14 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 180 Watt 35 Watt

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS, on the other hand, has a 2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 414.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS.

Note that Ryzen Threadripper 1950X is a desktop processor while Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS, 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 Threadripper 1950X
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS

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.


3.9 152 votes

Rate Ryzen Threadripper 1950X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 45 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen Threadripper 1950X or Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.