CPU Comparison
AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX vs Intel Xeon 676X
A side-by-side comparison of specs, performance and value. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX is a 64-core, 128-thread Zen 5 workstation processor on the sTR5 platform, designed for heavy multi-threaded workloads such as VFX rendering, scientific simulation, and large-scale AI development, with 8-channel DDR5-6400 and up to 148 PCIe 5.0 lanes.
The Bottom Line
Overview & Launch
Specifications Compared
Performance Compared
Productivity
Exceptional multi-threaded performance for professional applications; competes with or exceeds top Xeon workstation CPUs in many rendering and compilation workloads.
Excellent multi-threaded performance for professional applications; benefits from 32 P-cores and large cache in workloads like rendering, compilation, and scientific computing.
Gaming
Capable of high-refresh-rate gaming at 1440p and 4K in CPU-heavy titles, but not its focus; mainstream high-end desktop CPUs often match or beat it in gaming while costing far less.
Capable of high-refresh-rate gaming in many titles due to strong single-thread clocks, but not optimized for gaming; mainstream desktop CPUs often deliver better gaming performance per dollar and watt.
Virtualization
Excellent for running many VMs or containers simultaneously, thanks to 128 threads, 8-channel memory, and massive PCIe connectivity.
Very strong for dense virtualization labs, thanks to high core count, 8-channel memory, and extensive I/O for VM storage and networking.
Efficiency
High absolute performance but also high power draw; efficiency per watt is not a strength versus lower-core mainstream or server alternatives.
Performance-per-watt is reasonable for the core count and platform capabilities, but absolute power is high; efficient compared to older Xeon WS generations, less so vs low-core desktop chips.
Specialized Performance
AI / ML
- Good for CPU-based AI inference and model development, especially with 8-channel memory bandwidth.
- Lacks dedicated matrix or AI accelerators found in some newer server and workstation CPUs.
- Best for hybrid workflows combining local CPU inference with remote GPU or cloud acceleration.
- Intel AMX with FP16/BF16/INT8 accelerates inference and light training
- Not a replacement for dedicated GPUs or accelerators on large models
- Well suited for AI development, prototyping, and CPU-bound inference
Content Creation
Gaming
- Strong single-thread performance thanks to Zen 5 and 5.4 GHz boost.
- More than capable for 1440p/4K gaming with a high-end GPU.
- Significantly more expensive and power-hungry than gaming-focused desktop CPUs.
- Best suited for gaming as a secondary task on a workstation that also does heavy compute.
- High single-core boost up to 4.9 GHz helps keep frame rates smooth
- Not targeted at gamers; few games scale well beyond 16–24 threads
- Better suited as a gaming streaming + workstation hybrid than a pure gaming CPU
Industry Impact
Best CPU by Use Case
Target Audience
Strengths & Weaknesses
Pros
- 64 Zen 5 cores and 128 threads for extreme multi-threaded throughput.
- 8-channel DDR5-6400 with ECC and up to 2 TB capacity for large datasets.
- Up to 148 PCIe 5.0 lanes (128 Gen5) for multi-GPU and NVMe RAID configurations.
- AMD PRO technologies for security, encryption, and remote management.
- Unlocked multiplier for enthusiast tuning.
- Significant IPC uplift over prior Zen 4 Threadripper PRO generation.
Cons
- Very high platform cost (CPU, WRX90/TRX50 motherboard, 8-channel DDR5 RDIMMs).
- 350 W TDP requires robust cooling and a high-quality power supply.
- Efficiency per watt is unremarkable compared to lower-core alternatives.
- No integrated graphics; discrete GPU required for display.
- Overkill for gaming and light productivity workloads.
Pros
- 32 P-cores and 64 threads for heavily parallel workloads
- 128 PCIe 5.0 lanes for multi-GPU and storage configurations
- 8-channel DDR5/MRDIMM with up to 4 TB capacity
- Intel AMX with FP16 for improved AI inference
- Unlocked multiplier for overclocking on X-series SKUs
- Strong virtualization and security feature set (vPro, VT-x, VT-d, TME, CET)
Cons
- High power draw (275 W base, up to 330 W turbo)
- Expensive CPU and platform (W890 board, DDR5/MRDIMM)
- Overkill and inefficient for gaming or light tasks
- No integrated graphics, requires discrete GPU
- New platform; early firmware and BIOS maturity may vary
Competitors & Alternatives
AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX
- Intel Xeon w9-3495XRival
Workstation
- Intel Xeon w5-3435XRival
Workstation
- AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WXRival
Workstation
- AMD EPYC 9654Rival
Server/Workstation
- RivalCompare head-to-head
- AMD Ryzen 9 9950XAlt
High-end mainstream desktop CPU with much lower cost and power draw; sufficient if your workload fits within 16 cores and 2 memory channels.
Intel Xeon 676X
- AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9000 WX-SeriesRival
Workstation
- AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9000 WX-SeriesRival
Workstation
- AMD EPYC 9004 (Single-Socket Workstation)Rival
Server / Workstation
- Intel Xeon W-3500 Series (Sapphire Rapids-WS)Rival
Workstation
- Intel Xeon W-2500 Series (Emerald Rapids-WS)Rival
Workstation
Same platform with 28 cores and slightly lower TDP if you don’t need 32 cores.
Compare head-to-head- Intel Xeon 658XAlt
Fewer cores (24) but still full 144 MB L3 and 128 PCIe lanes at lower power.
Higher multi-threaded performance in many workloads, but different platform and memory ecosystem.
Compare head-to-headMore cores and PCIe lanes for bigger workstations, at higher cost and power.
Compare head-to-headBetter fit if you mainly game and do light content creation, with much lower platform cost.
Compare head-to-head
Our Verdict on Each
An extremely powerful workstation CPU that trades blows with top Xeon parts in multi-threaded workloads while offering substantially more PCIe 5.0 lanes and memory bandwidth, but it comes at a very high price and requires robust cooling and platform investment.
Best for: Building or upgrading a professional workstation for 3D rendering, simulation, AI development, or virtualization where you need 64+ cores, 8-channel memory, and massive PCIe 5.0 expansion.
Read the full reviewA powerful 32-core Granite Rapids-WS workstation CPU with excellent I/O, memory capacity, and AI acceleration, best suited for professional workloads where core count, PCIe lanes, and memory bandwidth matter more than raw gaming performance.
Best for: Professional workstation for rendering, simulation, AI development, or data analytics where you need 32+ cores, 128 PCIe lanes, and 8-channel memory.
Read the full reviewFrequently Asked Questions
Which is better, AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX or Intel Xeon 676X?
Based on our editorial ratings, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX comes out ahead with a score of 9/10. That said, the best choice depends on your workload — check the spec and performance breakdown above for gaming, productivity and efficiency differences.
Which is faster for gaming, AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX or Intel Xeon 676X?
For gaming, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX leads with a gaming performance score of 70/100 among AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX and Intel Xeon 676X.
Which uses less power?
The Intel Xeon 676X has the lowest rated TDP. Power draw across these chips: AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX (350 W), Intel Xeon 676X (275 W).
Do AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX and Intel Xeon 676X use the same socket?
No. They use different sockets (AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX: sTR5, Intel Xeon 676X: FCLGA4710), so each needs a compatible motherboard.
Which has more cores?
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX has the most cores. Core counts: AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX (64 cores), Intel Xeon 676X (32 cores).
Which is faster in multi-core benchmarks?
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX posts the highest multi-core benchmark score. Multi-core results: AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX (31,233), Intel Xeon 676X (0). Benchmark figures are approximate and workload-dependent.