EPYC 9355P vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX

AMD

EPYC 9355P

32 Cores64 Thrd280 WWMax: 4.4 GHz2024
VS
AMD

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX

24 Cores48 Thrd350 WWMax: 5.4 GHz2025

EPYC 9355P vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX Performance Spectrum

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

EPYC 9355P vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

EPYC 9355P vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

EPYC 9355P

2024

Why buy it

  • βœ…+3.8% higher PassMark.
  • βœ…+100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).
  • βœ…Draws 280W instead of 350W, a 70W reduction.

Trade-offs

  • ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
  • ❌
    3.4% HIGHER MSRP
    $2,998 MSRPvs$2,899 MSRP
  • ❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX

2025

Why buy it

  • βœ…Better for gaming: +14.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
  • βœ…Costs $99 less on MSRP ($2,899 MSRP vs $2,998 MSRP).
  • βœ…AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

  • ❌Lower PassMark (93,660 vs 97,249).
  • ❌Smaller total L3 cache (128 MB vs 256 MB).
  • ❌25% higher power demand at 350W vs 280W.

Quick Answers

So, is EPYC 9355P better than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX?
It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX is ahead with a 14.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9355P pulls ahead with 3.8% better PassMark. EPYC 9355P also has the bigger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 9355P is the stronger fit. You are getting 3.8% better PassMark, backed by 32 cores and 64 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 128 MB).
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
EPYC 9355P is the better buy right now. EPYC 9355P comes in 3.4% more expensive on MSRP at $2,998 MSRP versus $2,899 MSRP, and it still gives you 3.8% better PassMark. The compromise is that Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 14.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 0.4% better value on MSRP (32.4 vs 32.3 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2024) and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. That extra cache should keep paying off in CPU-limited games and high-refresh builds.

EPYC 9355P vs Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

AMD

EPYC 9355P

The EPYC 9355P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Turin (2024) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 3.55 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: SP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 280 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 97,249 points. Launch price was $2,998.

AMD

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX

The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 23 July 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Shimada Peak (2025) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 4.2 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: sTR5. Thermal design power (TDP): 350 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 93,660 points. Launch price was $2,899.

⚑

Processing Power

The EPYC 9355P packs 32 cores / 64 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX offers 24 cores / 48 threads β€” the EPYC 9355P has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the EPYC 9355P versus 5.4 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX β€” a 20.4% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX (base: 3.55 GHz vs 4.2 GHz). The EPYC 9355P uses the Turin (2024) architecture (4 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX uses Shimada Peak (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 9355P scores 97,249 against the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX's 93,660 β€” a 3.8% lead for the EPYC 9355P. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 9355P vs 128 MB (total) on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX.

FeatureEPYC 9355PRyzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX
Cores / Threads
32 / 64+33%
24 / 48
Boost Clock
4.4 GHz
5.4 GHz+23%
Base Clock
3.55 GHz
4.2 GHz+18%
L3 Cache
256 MB (total)+100%
128 MB (total)
L2 Cache
1 MB (per core)
1 MB (per core)
Process
4 nm
4 nm
Architecture
Turin (2024)
Shimada Peak (2025)
PassMark
97,249+4%
93,660
Cinebench R23 Multi
β€”
60,336
Geekbench 6 Single
β€”
3,349
Geekbench 6 Multi
β€”
30,722
🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 9355P uses the SP5 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX uses sTR5 (PCIe 4.0) β€” making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6000 on the EPYC 9355P versus DDR5-6400 on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX β€” the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX supports 6.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 9355P supports up to 6 TB of RAM compared to 2048 GB β€” 200% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 12 (EPYC 9355P) vs 8 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX). Both provide 128 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: SP5 (EPYC 9355P) and WRX90,TRX50 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX).

FeatureEPYC 9355PRyzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX
Socket
SP5
sTR5
PCIe Generation
PCIe 5.0+25%
PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed
DDR5-6000
DDR5-6400+7%
Max RAM Capacity
6 TB+200%
2048 GB
RAM Channels
12+50%
8
ECC Support
Yes
Yes
PCIe Lanes
128
128
πŸ”§

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: AMD-V, SEV-SNP (EPYC 9355P) vs true (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX). Primary use case: EPYC 9355P targets Data Center / Single Socket, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX targets High-end Workstation. Direct competitor: EPYC 9355P rivals Xeon 6740P; Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX rivals Xeon w9-3595X.

FeatureEPYC 9355PRyzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX
Integrated GPU
No
No
AVX-512
β€”
Yes
Virtualization
AMD-V, SEV-SNP
true
Target Use
Data Center / Single Socket
High-end Workstation
πŸ’°

Value Analysis

At launch, the EPYC 9355P was priced at $2998, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX came in at $2899. On launch pricing ($2998 vs $2899), Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX was $99 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 9355P delivers 32.4 pts/$ vs 32.3 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX β€” making the EPYC 9355P the 0.4% better value option.

FeatureEPYC 9355PRyzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX
MSRP
$2998
$2899-3%
Performance per Dollar
32.4
32.3
Release Date
2024
2025

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.