i5-540UM vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX outperforms Core i5-540UM by a whopping 9248% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX and Core i5-540UM processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 19 | 2764 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Server | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Ryzen Threadripper | Intel Core i5 |
| Power efficiency | 19.82 | 3.30 |
| Architecture codename | Chagall PRO (2022) | Arrandale (2010−2011) |
| Release date | 8 March 2022 (2 years ago) | 24 May 2010 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $250 |
Detailed specifications
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX and Core i5-540UM 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 128 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.7 GHz | 1.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.5 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 1.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 1 × 2.5 GT/s |
| Multiplier | 27 | 9 |
| L1 cache | 4 MB | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 32 MB | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 256 MB | 3 MB |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 8x 81 mm2 | 81+114 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 95 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 33,200 million | 382+177 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX and Core i5-540UM 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 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | WRX8 | BGA1288 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 280 Watt | 18 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX and Core i5-540UM. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | + | - |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | + |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Flex Memory Access | no data | + |
| PAE | no data | 36 Bit |
| FDI | no data | + |
| Fast Memory Access | no data | + |
Security technologies
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX and Core i5-540UM technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX and Core i5-540UM are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX and Core i5-540UM. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-3200 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 2 TiB | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | 12.799 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | - | Intel® HD Graphics for Previous Generation Intel® Processors |
| Clear Video | - | + |
| Clear Video HD | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | - | 500 MHz |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX and Core i5-540UM integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | - | 2 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX and Core i5-540UM.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 128 | 16 |
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 58.89 | 0.63 |
| Recency | 8 March 2022 | 24 May 2010 |
| Physical cores | 64 | 2 |
| Threads | 128 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 280 Watt | 18 Watt |
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX has a 9247.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, 3100% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 357.1% more advanced lithography process.
i5-540UM, on the other hand, has 1455.6% lower power consumption.
The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-540UM in performance tests.
Be aware that Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX is a server/workstation processor while Core i5-540UM is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5995WX and Core i5-540UM, 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.
