CPU Comparison

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX vs Intel Xeon 696X

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.

Top pick
AMD · Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9000 WX-Series
AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX
64C / 128T5.4 GHz350 W
9
Full review
Intel · Xeon
Intel Xeon 696X
64C / 128T4.8 GHz350 W
8.8
Full review

The Bottom Line

Overview & Launch

Brand
AMD
Intel
Market
Workstation
Workstation / HEDT
Segment
Workstation
Workstation / High-End Desktop (HEDT)
Generation
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9000 WX-Series (Zen 5)
6th Gen Xeon (Granite Rapids-WS)
Launched
2025
2026
Status
Launched
Launched
Codename
Shimada Peak
Granite Rapids-WS
Series
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9000 WX-Series
Xeon
Family
Ryzen Threadripper PRO
Granite Rapids-WS (Xeon 600)
Predecessor
AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX
Intel Xeon W9‑3595X / W‑3400 series (Sapphire Rapids‑WS)

Specifications Compared

Cores & Clocks
Cores
64
64
Threads
128
128
Base Clock
3.2 GHz
2.4 GHz
Boost Clock
5.4 GHz
4.8 GHz
Cache & Power
L3 Cache
256 MB
336 MB
L2 Cache
64 MB
TDP
350 W
350 W
Architecture
Architecture
Zen 5 (Shimada Peak)
Granite Rapids-WS (Redwood Cove P-cores)
Process Node
TSMC 4nm FinFET
Intel 3 compute tiles, Intel 7 I/O tiles
Memory
Memory Type
DDR5
DDR5, MRDIMM
Memory Speed
DDR5-6400
DDR5‑6400, MRDIMM‑8000
Memory Channels
Octa (8)
Octa (8)
Max Memory
2048 GB
4096 GB
Platform & I/O
Socket
sTR5
FCLGA4710
PCIe Version
PCIe 5.0
PCIe 5.0
PCIe Lanes
148
128
Integrated GPU
None
None
Unlocked
Yes
No

Performance Compared

Productivity

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WXBest97

Exceptional multi-threaded performance for professional applications; competes with or exceeds top Xeon workstation CPUs in many rendering and compilation workloads.

Intel Xeon 696X0

Designed for productivity; expect very high multi‑threaded performance in rendering, compilation, and data processing, but no standardized, verified scores are available yet.

Gaming

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WXBest70

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.

Intel Xeon 696X0

Not a gaming‑focused CPU; few real‑game benchmarks exist. Single‑thread performance is competitive, but gaming is limited by GPU and platform optimization, and gamers have cheaper, better‑suited options.

Virtualization

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WXBest98

Excellent for running many VMs or containers simultaneously, thanks to 128 threads, 8-channel memory, and massive PCIe connectivity.

Intel Xeon 696X0

Excellent candidate for large VM farms and container hosts due to 64 cores and 128 threads, but no official benchmark scores exist; real‑world scaling depends on workload and I/O.

Efficiency

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WXBest60

High absolute performance but also high power draw; efficiency per watt is not a strength versus lower-core mainstream or server alternatives.

Intel Xeon 696X0

350W base and up to 420W turbo power means efficiency is not a priority; performance‑per‑watt will trail lower‑core‑count alternatives, especially at idle or light loads.

Specialized Performance

AI / ML

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WXVery Good
  • 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 Xeon 696XVery Good
  • Intel AMX and AVX‑512 FP16 provide strong CPU‑side inference for small to medium models.
  • Not a replacement for dedicated GPUs or accelerators on large LLMs.
  • Well‑suited for edge inference, batch scoring, and pre‑processing stages of AI pipelines.

Content Creation

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WXExcellent
BlenderMaya3ds MaxCinema 4DV-RayKeyShotOctaneRenderAdobe After EffectsDaVinci ResolvePremiere Pro
Intel Xeon 696XExcellent
BlenderCinema 4DV-RayArnoldAdobe Premiere Pro / After EffectsDaVinci Resolve

Gaming

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WXGood
  • 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.
Intel Xeon 696XNot recommended
  • High single‑thread clocks help some titles, but core count is largely wasted for gaming.
  • Platform is optimized for professional workloads, not game scheduling.
  • Cost and power are hard to justify for a gaming‑only use case.

Industry Impact

Gaming
Low
Low
Workstations
High
High
Content Creation
High
High
Virtualization
High
High

Best CPU by Use Case

3D Rendering & VFX
Excellent
Excellent
Scientific & Engineering Simulation
Excellent
Local AI/ML Development & Inference
Very Good
Virtualization & Cloud Workstations
Excellent
Large-Scale Compilation & Data Processing
Very Good
Scientific & Technical Computing
Excellent
AI/ML Inference (CPU)
Very Good
Virtualization & Simulation
Excellent
High‑End Office / Light Development
Overkill

Target Audience

Gamers
Content Creators
Targeted
Targeted
Developers
Targeted
Targeted
Workstation Users
Targeted
Targeted
Streamers
Office / Productivity
Students

Strengths & Weaknesses

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX

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.
Intel Xeon 696X

Pros

  • 64 cores and 128 threads for heavily parallel workloads
  • 128 PCIe 5.0 lanes for multi‑GPU and fast storage
  • 8‑channel DDR5‑6400 / MRDIMM‑8000 memory with 4 TB support
  • Modern Redwood Cove P‑cores with AMX and AVX‑512 AI acceleration
  • Single‑socket W890 workstation platform with vPro manageability

Cons

  • Very high power draw (350W base, up to 420W turbo)
  • Expensive CPU and platform (W890 motherboard, 8‑channel DDR5, robust PSU)
  • Locked multiplier limits overclocking headroom
  • Overkill for gaming and light workloads
  • Limited real‑world benchmarks and software optimizations so far

Competitors & Alternatives

AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX

  • Intel Xeon w9-3495X

    Workstation

    Rival
  • Intel Xeon w5-3435X

    Workstation

    Rival
  • AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

    Workstation

    Rival
  • AMD EPYC 9654

    Server/Workstation

    Rival
  • Compare head-to-head
  • AMD Ryzen 9 9950X
    Alt

    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 696X

  • AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7985WX

    Workstation

    Rival
  • AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX

    Workstation

    Rival
  • AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WX

    Workstation

    Rival
  • Rival
    Compare head-to-head
  • Intel Xeon 698X

    Workstation

    Rival
    Compare head-to-head
  • AMD Ryzen Threadripper 7980X
    Alt

    Non‑PRO Threadripper with 64 cores and more OC headroom if you don’t need PRO manageability features.

  • Dual‑socket Xeon server platform
    Alt

    If you need >86 cores or dual‑socket RAS features, a 2S Xeon Granite Rapids‑SP server may be more appropriate.

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 review
Intel Xeon 696XRecommended

A no‑compromise workstation CPU for users who need maximum core count, PCIe lanes, and memory bandwidth in a single socket, provided you can supply sufficient cooling and power.

Best for: Professional workstation for rendering, simulation, or AI where you need maximum cores, PCIe lanes, and memory in a single socket and can justify the high platform cost.

Read the full review

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better, AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX or Intel Xeon 696X?

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 696X?

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 696X.

Do AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX and Intel Xeon 696X use the same socket?

No. They use different sockets (AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9985WX: sTR5, Intel Xeon 696X: FCLGA4710), so each needs a compatible motherboard.

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 696X (0). Benchmark figures are approximate and workload-dependent.