Ryzen Threadripper 1900 vs Ryzen Threadripper 3970X
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen Threadripper 3970X and Ryzen Threadripper 1900 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 65 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 15.62 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Ryzen Threadripper | no data |
| Power efficiency | 13.44 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Matisse (2019−2020) | Zen (2017−2020) |
| Release date | 25 November 2019 (4 years ago) | 31 August 2017 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $1,999 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen Threadripper 3970X and Ryzen Threadripper 1900 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) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 64 | 16 |
| Base clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 3.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.5 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| Bus rate | 8 × 16 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 37 | no data |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 128 MB | 32 MB |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm, 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | no data | 213 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 19,200 million | 9,600 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen Threadripper 3970X and Ryzen Threadripper 1900 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 | 1 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | TR4 | SP3r2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 280 Watt | 125 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper 3970X and Ryzen Threadripper 1900. 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 Ryzen Threadripper 3970X and Ryzen Threadripper 1900 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper 3970X and Ryzen Threadripper 1900. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Eight-channel | DDR4 Quad-channel |
| Maximum memory size | 256 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 4 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 102.403 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 25 November 2019 | 31 August 2017 |
| Physical cores | 32 | 8 |
| Threads | 64 | 16 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 280 Watt | 125 Watt |
Ryzen Threadripper 3970X has an age advantage of 2 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
Ryzen Threadripper 1900, on the other hand, has 124% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Ryzen Threadripper 3970X and Ryzen Threadripper 1900. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen Threadripper 3970X and Ryzen Threadripper 1900, 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.
