M1 Max vs Ryzen Threadripper 1920

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.

M1 Max vs Ryzen Threadripper 1920 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.

M1 Max vs Ryzen Threadripper 1920: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

M1 Max

2021

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (48 MB vs 32 MB).
✅Draws 28W instead of 140W, a 112W reduction.
✅Newer platform on none with DDR5 support instead of SP3r2 and DDR4.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with M1 Max GPU, while Ryzen Threadripper 1920 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper 1920 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper 1920, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads.

Ryzen Threadripper 1920

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (22,066 vs 22,146).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (32 MB vs 48 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $799 MSRP, while M1 Max mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌400% higher power demand at 140W vs 28W.
❌Older platform position on SP3r2 with DDR4, while M1 Max moves to none and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is M1 Max better than Ryzen Threadripper 1920?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Ryzen Threadripper 1920 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while M1 Max is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, M1 Max is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 10 cores and 10 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (48 MB vs 32 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

M1 Max is still the faster CPU overall, but Ryzen Threadripper 1920 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. M1 Max comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $799 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.4% better PassMark. The compromise is that Ryzen Threadripper 1920 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 4.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Ryzen Threadripper 1920 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (27.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

M1 Max makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2021 vs 2017), a healthier platform with none and DDR5 instead of SP3r2, 50% larger total L3 cache (48 MB vs 32 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 10 cores / 10 threads instead of 12/24. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

M1 Max vs Ryzen Threadripper 1920 Technical Specifications

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

M1 Max

The M1 Max is manufactured by Apple. It was released in 18 October 2021 (4 years ago). It features 10 cores and 10 threads. Base frequency is 2.06 GHz, with boost up to 3.22 GHz. L3 cache: 48 MB. L2 cache: 28 MB. Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: none. Thermal design power (TDP): 28 MB + 48 MB. Memory support: LPDDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 22,146 points. Launch price was $299.

Ryzen Threadripper 1920

The Ryzen Threadripper 1920 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 29 July 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Zen (2017−2020) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3r2. Thermal design power (TDP): 140 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Quad-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 22,066 points. Launch price was $299.

⚡

Processing Power

The M1 Max packs 10 cores / 10 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper 1920 offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the Ryzen Threadripper 1920 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.22 GHz on the M1 Max versus 3.8 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper 1920 — a 16.5% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper 1920 (base: 2.06 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The Ryzen Threadripper 1920 is built on the Zen (2017−2020) architecture. In PassMark, the M1 Max scores 22,146 against the Ryzen Threadripper 1920's 22,066 — a 0.4% lead for the M1 Max. L3 cache: 48 MB on the M1 Max vs 32 MB on the Ryzen Threadripper 1920.

Feature	M1 Max	Ryzen Threadripper 1920
Cores / Threads	10 / 10	12 / 24+20%
Boost Clock	3.22 GHz	3.8 GHz+18%
Base Clock	2.06 GHz	3.2 GHz+55%
L3 Cache	48 MB+50%	32 MB
L2 Cache	28 MB+5500%	512 kB (per core)
Process	5 nm-64%	14 nm
Architecture	—	Zen (2017−2020)
PassMark	22,146	22,066

🧠

Memory & Platform

The M1 Max uses the none socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper 1920 uses SP3r2 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	M1 Max	Ryzen Threadripper 1920
Socket	none	SP3r2
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	LPDDR5-6400	—
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB	—
RAM Channels	8	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	0	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: ARM-V (M1 Max) / not specified (Ryzen Threadripper 1920). The M1 Max includes integrated graphics (M1 Max GPU), while the Ryzen Threadripper 1920 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: M1 Max targets Mobile Workstation.