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 7945WX review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£1,090PassMark multi-core score:49636N. of physical cores:12CPU boost clock speed:5.3 GHzCPU socket:sTR5TDP (Thermal design power):350 W

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX Review: Compare 74 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

7.8/10

Overall score

Score
7.8/ 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 89% of models
Score components

40%

8.6

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.2, the mark of a weaker model in this category

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 89% of processors
6.9

Value for money

Value for money
6.9/ 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 75% of models
Score components

70%

7.8

Overall score

30%

4.8

Price

â–¼Worse than 75%
8.6

Technical score

Technical score
8.6/ 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
★ Better than 95% of models
Score components

60%

9.0

Performance

18%

8.4

Architecture

10%

9.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

4.5

Power & Thermal

4%

9.4

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

★Better than 95%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
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
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.2.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

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
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £1,090
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX

Technical score
Technical score
8.6/ 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
★ Better than 95% of models
Score components:

60%

9.0

Performance

18%

8.4

Architecture

10%

9.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

4.5

Power & Thermal

4%

9.4

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

8.6
Reviews score
7.2
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.9/ 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 75% of models
Score components:

70%

7.8

Overall score

30%

4.8

Price

6.9
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.
desktop workstation
CPU socket
sTR5
This processor uses the sTR5 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 93.6% of processors and equal to that of 1.3% of processors.
Chipset
WRX90, TRX50
This processor supports WRX90, TRX50 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 99% of processors and equal to that of 1% 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, AVX-512, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V instruction sets, which is broader support than 69.3% of processors and equal to that of 7.1% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
12
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 12 CPU cores, which is more than 79.9% of processors and equal to 5.7% of processors.
CPU threads
24
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 24 CPU threads, which is more than 89.7% of processors and equal to 4.4% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
5.3 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 5.3 GHz which is higher than that of 91.9% of processors and equal to that of 2.3% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
12x 4.7 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 12x4.7 GHz which is higher than that of 96.3% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
49,636
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 49,636 in PassMark, which is higher than 95.4% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
5 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 5 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 83.5% of processors and equal to that of 3.2% of processors.
Foundry
TSMC 5 nm
This processor is built on the TSMC 5 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 83.1% of processors and equal to that of 3.2% of processors.
L3 cache
64 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 64 MB which is larger than that of 94.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.8% of processors.
L2 cache
12 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 12 MB which is larger than that of 83.1% of processors and equal to that of 2.9% of processors.
L1 cache
768 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 768 KB which is larger than that of 77.6% of processors and equal to that of 3.3% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR5
This processor supports DDR DDR5, which is newer than that of 64.2% of processors and equal to that of 12.8% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
5,200 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 5,200 MHz, which is higher than that of 70.6% of processors and equal to 6.6% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR5-5200 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR5-5200 MHz, which is higher than that of 71% of processors and equal to 5.6% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
5,200 MHz
This processor supports XMP/EXPO memory speeds up to 5,200 MHz, which is higher than that of 94.7% of processors and equal to 1.4% of processors.
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)
350 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 350 W which is higher than that of 98.8% of processors and equal to that of 1.2% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
350 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 350 W which is higher than that of 98.8% of processors and equal to that of 1.3% 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 7945WX vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 4.33x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (49,636 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    49,636 vs 11,469
  • 3.43x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (17,843 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    17,843 vs 5,209
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Storm Peak vs Kaby Lake).
    Storm Peak vs Kaby Lake
  • 60.4% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,103 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,103 vs 2,558
  • 8 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (12 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    12 vs 4
  • 80% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,763 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,763 vs 1,535
  • 16 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (24 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    24 vs 8
  • 2.38x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (6,671 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    6,671 vs 2,804.5
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (sTR5 vs FP5).
    sTR5 vs FP5
  • More extensive crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, VAES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA).
    AES, VAES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA
  • Higher-end processor class
    This processor belongs to a higher-end processor class than the average processor (workstation vs mobile).
    desktop workstation
    workstation vs mobile
  • 3 years newer release date
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2023 vs 2020).
    October 2023
    2023 vs 2020
  • 4.33x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (49,636 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    49,636 vs 11,469
  • 3.43x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (17,843 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    17,843 vs 5,209
  • 60.4% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,103 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,103 vs 2,558
  • 8 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (12 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    12 vs 4
  • 80% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,763 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,763 vs 1,535
  • 16 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (24 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    24 vs 8
  • 2.38x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (6,671 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    6,671 vs 2,804.5
  • 6 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (12 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    12 vs 6
  • 20.5% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.3 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5.3 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (12x4.7 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    12x4.7 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 19 higher clock multiplier
    This processor has a higher clock multiplier than the average processor (47 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    47 vs 28
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Storm Peak vs Kaby Lake).
    Storm Peak vs Kaby Lake
  • 7.11x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (64 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    64 MB vs 9 MB
  • 4x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (12 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    12 MB vs 3 MB
  • 2.88x more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (5.3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    5.33 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 58.3% smaller process node
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (5 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    5 nm vs 12 nm
  • 59.9% smaller die size
    This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (71 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    71 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (TSMC 5 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    TSMC 5 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • 2x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 2x larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (768 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    768 KB vs 384 KB
  • 2.65x more transistors
    This processor has more transistors than the average processor (13.1 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
    13.14 billion vs 4.95 billion
  • 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
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 vs 3).
    5 vs 3
  • 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
  • 7.1x higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (332.8 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    332.8 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR5 vs DDR4
  • 62.5% higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (5,200 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    5,200 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • Higher JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR5-5200 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    DDR5-5,200 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • 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
  • 7.78x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (350 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    350 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.
  • 7.78x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (350 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    350 W vs 45 W
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x8/x8, x8/x4/x4, x4/x4/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x8/x8, x8/x4/x4, x4/x4/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 5 °C lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • 4.36x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX is more expensive than the average processor (£1,090 vs £250).
    £1,090 vs £250
  • No integrated graphics
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, while the average processor does. 85.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • 5.7% worse value for money
    AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX has worse value for money than the average processor (6.89 vs 7.3).
    6.89 vs 7.29
  • 4.36x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX is more expensive than the average processor (£1,090 vs £250).
    £1,090 vs £250
  • 5.7% worse value for money
    AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX has worse value for money than the average processor (6.89 vs 7.3).
    6.89 vs 7.29
  • 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
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x8/x8, x8/x4/x4, x4/x4/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x8/x8, x8/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.
  • 7.78x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (350 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    350 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.
  • 7.78x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (350 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    350 W vs 45 W
  • 5 °C lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX

  • High single-core and boost clock speeds (up to 5.3 GHz) making it responsive for lightly threaded tasks like Photoshop.
  • Professional-grade 8-channel DDR5 memory support, allowing for massive RAM capacities up to 2TB.
  • Extensive PCIe 5.0 connectivity with 128 lanes, ideal for multi-GPU setups and high-speed storage.
  • Unlocked multiplier allows for performance tuning and overclocking.
  • Significant efficiency and IPC gains from the Zen 4 5nm architecture compared to previous generations.

What customers don't like about AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX

  • Extremely high platform cost, including expensive WRX90/TRX50 motherboards and required registered ECC DDR5 memory.
  • Limited memory bandwidth on this specific 12-core model (2 CCDs) compared to higher core-count Threadripper PRO models.
  • High power consumption and thermal output (350W TDP), requiring robust and often expensive cooling solutions.
  • Niche value proposition, as many users might find better value in high-end consumer chips like the Ryzen 9 7950X for standard tasks.
  • Compatibility risks such as vendor-locking on certain OEM-sourced units.

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX is a professional workstation processor based on the 5nm 'Zen 4' architecture, featuring 12 cores and 24 threads with a base clock of 4.7 GHz and a boost clock of up to 5.3 GHz. Key specifications include 64 MB of L3 cache, a high default TDP of 350W, and massive expansion capabilities via 128 PCIe 5.0 lanes and 8-channel DDR5-5200 memory support up to 2 TB. Its main pros include industry-leading I/O bandwidth, support for ECC memory, and enterprise-grade AMD PRO security and manageability features that make it ideal for complex multitasking and data-intensive professional workflows. However, notable cons include its high power consumption and the requirement for a specialized sTR5 socket and WRX90 motherboard, which, combined with the lack of integrated graphics and the absence of a thermal solution in the box, lead to a high total system cost.

Compare AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX 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 7945WX and other processors

No results found