OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£4,830PassMark multi-core score:82745N. of physical cores:64CPU boost clock speed:4.2 GHzCPU socket:sWRX8TDP (Thermal design power):280 W

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 5 expert reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX
7.7/10

Overall score

Score
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 87% of models
Score components

40%

7.8

Technical score

25%

8.2

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–²Better than 87% of processors
5.7

Value for money

Value for money
5.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components

70%

7.7

Overall score

30%

1.0

Price

â–¼Worse than 99%
7.8

Technical score

Technical score
7.8/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 82% of models
Score components

60%

8.3

Performance

18%

7.5

Architecture

10%

8.0

Memory & PCIe

7%

4.2

Power & Thermal

4%

8.9

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 82%
8.2

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.2/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 83% of models

80%

8.2

Average grade

20%

8.2

Popularity

Grades by review (5)
5 reviews: 2 with a printed score, 3 estimated from the review. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–²Better than 83%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • amd-ryzen-threadripper-pro-3995wx
  • amd-ryzen-threadripper-pro-3995wx
  • amd-ryzen-threadripper-pro-3995wx
  • amd-ryzen-threadripper-pro-3995wx
amd-ryzen-threadripper-pro-3995wx
amd-ryzen-threadripper-pro-3995wx
amd-ryzen-threadripper-pro-3995wx
amd-ryzen-threadripper-pro-3995wx
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX

Based on 3

Reviewers agree its multi-core performance is outstanding, with few other strengths or complaints raised.
Praised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX

Technical score
Technical score
7.8/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 82% of models
Score components:

60%

8.3

Performance

18%

7.5

Architecture

10%

8.0

Memory & PCIe

7%

4.2

Power & Thermal

4%

8.9

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

7.8
Reviews score
8.2
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
5.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components:

70%

7.7

Overall score

30%

1.0

Price

5.7
Processor type
workstation
This processor belongs to the workstation processor class, which is more advanced than that of 95.4% of processors and equal to that of 4.6% of processors.
professional workstation
CPU socket
sWRX8
This processor uses the sWRX8 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 93% of processors and equal to that of 0.6% of processors.
Chipset
WRX80
This processor supports WRX80 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 97.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.7% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2, AMD-V
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2, AMD-V instruction sets, which is broader support than 85.3% of processors and equal to that of 6% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
64
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 64 CPU cores, which is more than 99.4% of processors and equal to 0.4% of processors.
CPU threads
128
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 128 CPU threads, which is more than 99.4% of processors and equal to 0.4% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.2 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.2 GHz which is lower than that of 54.4% of processors and equal to that of 4.2% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
64x 2.7 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 64x2.7 GHz which is higher than that of 99.4% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
82,745
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 82,745 in PassMark, which is higher than 99% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
7 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 7 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 70.4% of processors and equal to that of 10.5% of processors.
Foundry
TSMC 7 nm
This processor is built on the TSMC 7 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 55.6% of processors and equal to that of 9.2% of processors.
L3 cache
256 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 256 MB which is larger than that of 99.4% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
L2 cache
32 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 32 MB which is larger than that of 96.1% of processors and equal to that of 2% of processors.
L1 cache
4,096 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 4,096 KB which is larger than that of 99% of processors and equal to that of 0.3% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 25.2% of processors and equal to that of 31.1% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
3,200 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 3,200 MHz, which is higher than that of 49.8% of processors and equal to 8.5% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-3200 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR4-3200 MHz, which is higher than that of 46.1% of processors and equal to 9.4% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
2 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 2 TB of memory, which is more than 98.4% of processors and equal to 1.6% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
no
This processor does not include integrated graphics. 85.4% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
N/A
Integrated GPU execution units
N/A
Integrated GPU base frequency
N/A
Integrated media encoders/decoders
N/A
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
280 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 280 W which is higher than that of 97.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.8% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
280 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 280 W which is higher than that of 97.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.7% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 7.21x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (82,745 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    82,745 vs 11,469
  • 58 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (64 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    64 vs 6
  • 2.73x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (14,237 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    14,237 vs 5,209
  • 8.72x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (24,463 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    24,463 vs 2,804.5
  • 60 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (64 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    64 vs 4
  • 120 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (128 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    128 vs 8
  • 28.44x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (256 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    256 MB vs 9 MB
  • 10.67x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (32 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    32 MB vs 3 MB
  • 22.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.2/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 83% of models

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    8.2

    Popularity

    Grades by review (5)
    5 reviews: 2 with a printed score, 3 estimated from the review. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.2 vs 6.7
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (sWRX8 vs FP5).
    sWRX8 vs FP5
  • Higher-end processor class
    This processor belongs to a higher-end processor class than the average processor (workstation vs mobile).
    professional workstation
    workstation vs mobile
  • Broader instruction support
    This processor supports a broader instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2, AMD-V vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2, AMD-V vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 7.21x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (82,745 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    82,745 vs 11,469
  • 58 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (64 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    64 vs 6
  • 2.73x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (14,237 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    14,237 vs 5,209
  • 8.72x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (24,463 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    24,463 vs 2,804.5
  • 60 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (64 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    64 vs 4
  • 120 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (128 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    128 vs 8
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (64x2.7 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    64x2.7 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 28.44x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (256 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    256 MB vs 9 MB
  • 10.67x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (32 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    32 MB vs 3 MB
  • 2.16x more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (4 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    4 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 10.67x larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (4,096 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    4,096 KB vs 384 KB
  • 58.2% smaller die size
    This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (74 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    74 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 6.14x more transistors
    This processor has more transistors than the average processor (30.4 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
    30.4 billion vs 4.95 billion
  • 41.7% smaller process node
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (7 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    7 nm vs 12 nm
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (TSMC 7 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    TSMC 7 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • 112 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (128 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    128 vs 16
  • 32x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (2 TB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    2 TB vs 64 GB
  • 4.37x higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (204.8 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    204.8 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4.0 vs 3.0
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • 5 °C lower CPU temperature
    This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • 6.22x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (280 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    280 W vs 45 W
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Castle Peak vs Kaby Lake).
    Castle Peak vs Kaby Lake
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x4/x4/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x4/x4/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 10 °C lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (90 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    90 °C vs 100 °C
  • 6.22x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (280 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    280 W vs 45 W
  • 19.32x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX is more expensive than the average processor (£4,830 vs £250).
    £4,830 vs £250
  • 27.3% worse value for money
    AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX has worse value for money than the average processor (5.72 vs 7.3).
    5.72 vs 7.29
  • 19.32x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX is more expensive than the average processor (£4,830 vs £250).
    £4,830 vs £250
  • 27.3% worse value for money
    AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX has worse value for money than the average processor (5.72 vs 7.3).
    5.72 vs 7.29
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, Memory Guard, Secure Processor, Secure Boot, SME, SEV, SEV-ES, SEV-SNP vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, Memory Guard, Secure Processor, Secure Boot, SME, SEV, SEV-ES, SEV-SNP vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Older TPM support
    This processor supports an older TPM version than the average processor (fTPM 2 vs PTT 2).
    fTPM 2.0 vs PTT 2.0
  • 4.5% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (4.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Castle Peak vs Kaby Lake).
    Castle Peak vs Kaby Lake
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x4/x4/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x4/x4/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 6 fewer memory channels
    This processor has fewer memory channels than the average processor (8 vs 2). The average processor supports 2 memory channels.
    8 vs 2
  • No integrated graphics
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, while the average processor does. 85.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • 6.22x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (280 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    280 W vs 45 W
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 6.22x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (280 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    280 W vs 45 W
  • 10 °C lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (90 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    90 °C vs 100 °C

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Overview video
Shop video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

9.0
tomshardware.com
✓ explicit
07/09/2023
Lab test · Workstation CPU
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX is a leading workstation chip with 64 cores and eight memory channels, but it needs WRX80 boards, and some software can't use 128 threads.
8.0
hwupgrade.it
≈ estimated
06/07/2021
Hands-on test · Workstation PC
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX in Lenovo's ThinkStation P620 is a 64-core workstation for parallel work, but it boots slowly and is loud at startup.
9.0
notebookcheck.nl
≈ estimated
08/08/2021
Benchmark review · Workstation PC
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX in Lenovo's ThinkStation P620 is a strong multi-core workstation that holds its speed, but single-core tasks trail desktop chips.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX

  • Unrivaled multi-core performance with 64 cores and 128 threads for workstation tasks
  • Eight-channel DDR4 memory support significantly improves bandwidth over consumer models
  • Massive PCIe 4.0 support with 128 lanes for extensive GPU and NVMe storage configurations
  • Supports up to 2TB of ECC memory, essential for mission-critical professional datasets
  • Outperforms many dual-socket Intel Xeon systems in heavily threaded workloads
  • Includes AMD PRO security features and enterprise-level manageability

What customers don't like about AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX

  • Extremely high initial MSRP (approx. $5,489) makes it a niche professional investment
  • High 280W TDP requires substantial and high-quality cooling solutions
  • Limited motherboard ecosystem (requires WRX80 chipset) compared to consumer platforms
  • Multiplier is locked, which severely limits traditional overclocking potential
  • Slightly lower base and boost clock speeds compared to the non-Pro 3990X model
  • Older Zen 2 architecture when compared to newer Zen 3 or Zen 4 alternatives

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX is a flagship 64-core, 128-thread workstation processor based on the 7nm Zen 2 architecture, featuring a 2.7 GHz base clock and a 4.2 GHz boost. Designed for the sWRX8 socket, it offers professional-grade features including 128 PCIe 4.0 lanes, an 8-channel DDR4-3200 memory interface supporting up to 2TB of ECC RAM, and 256MB of L3 cache. Its primary strengths are its industry-leading multi-threaded performance for rendering and simulations, massive I/O expansion, and enterprise security via AMD Memory Guard. However, it carries a high price tag, a substantial 280W TDP requiring high-end cooling, and its multiplier is locked, which limits traditional overclocking.

Compare AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX and other processors

No results found