EPYC 9254 vs Ryzen Threadripper 5990X
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen Threadripper 5990X and EPYC 9254 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 55 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 15.75 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | no data | AMD EPYC |
| Power efficiency | no data | 20.21 |
| Architecture codename | Chagall | Genoa (2022−2023) |
| Release date | no data (2024 years ago) | 10 November 2022 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $2,299 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen Threadripper 5990X and EPYC 9254 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 | 64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core) | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) |
| Threads | 128 | 48 |
| Base clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 2.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.45 GHz | 4.15 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 29 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 256 MB | 128 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 5 nm, 6 nm |
| Die size | 8x 81 mm2 | 4x 72 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 95 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 33,200 million | 26,280 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen Threadripper 5990X and EPYC 9254 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 | 2 |
| Socket | TRX4 | SP5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 280 Watt | 200 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper 5990X and EPYC 9254. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper 5990X and EPYC 9254 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper 5990X and EPYC 9254. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200 | DDR5-4800 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 6 TiB |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 460.8 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen Threadripper 5990X and EPYC 9254.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 128 | 128 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 64 | 24 |
| Threads | 128 | 48 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 280 Watt | 200 Watt |
Ryzen Threadripper 5990X has 166.7% more physical cores and 166.7% more threads.
EPYC 9254, on the other hand, has a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 40% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Ryzen Threadripper 5990X and EPYC 9254. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Ryzen Threadripper 5990X is a desktop processor while EPYC 9254 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen Threadripper 5990X and EPYC 9254, 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.
