Blender: AMD Threadripper PRO 7000 WX-Series vs Intel Xeon W-3400

Introduction

With their “7000” series of processors, AMD is once again splitting their high core-count CPUs into two separate product families: the High-End Desktop (HEDT) AMD Ryzen Threadripper 7000 Series, and the even higher tier AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7000 WX-Series processors. Both are based on AMD’s Zen 4 architecture, which means they now support new technologies like PCI-e Gen 5.0 and DDR5 memory, but the “PRO” line includes twice the number of memory lanes (8 channel vs 4 channel) and more than twice the number of PCIe Gen5 lanes (128 vs 48). In addition, the higher line also includes a 96-core processor for those workloads that benefit from having a massive number of CPU cores.

We recently reviewed the Threadripper 7000 line, comparing them to the equivalent Intel Xeon W-3400 processors, and found that the new Threadripper processors placed AMD in the lead over Intel in every single content creation workload we tested. Today, we are going bump it up a notch, and do the same testing with the AMD Threadripper PRO 7000 WX-Series.

We will note that in many of these workloads, the benefits of the PRO series are not as applicable as you may expect. The extra PCI-e lanes are only a benefit if you plan to use more than three GPUs (or other x16 PCIe devices), and even then will often only have a minimal impact. This is partly because using more than three GPUs in a desktop is very difficult given the power draw of modern GPUs, but also because the performance penalty of running a GPU at x8 speeds instead of x16 is often minimal. Similarly, the additional memory channels are mostly beneficial in memory-bound workflows, which most content creation applications are not.

With that explained, we have a dedicated AMD Threadripper 7000 vs AMD Threadripper PRO 7000WX for Content Creation article if you want to see exactly where (and by how much) it may make sense to invest in the PRO line. But in this article, we want to focus on the performance of the Threadripper PRO 7000 WX-Series compared to the previous generation Threadripper PRO 5000WX and the Intel Xeon W-2400/3400 line. In addition to Threadripper PRO and Xeon, we will also include the Intel Core 14900K to provide some context for how AMD Threadripper PRO compares to a more typical CPU choice for those working with Blender, but not doing much rendering.

Because there are so many CPUs to examine, we will break our analysis down into Intel vs AMD (AMD Threadripper PRO 7000WX vs Intel Xeon W-3400) and performance versus the previous generation (AMD Threadripper PRO 7000WX vs AMD Threadripper PRO 5000WX)

To learn more about how the new AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7000 WX-Series processors perform in other workflows, we have compiled an overview in our AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7000WX Content Creation Review article. That post also includes more detailed information on the CPU specifications and test results for various applications: Photoshop, Lightroom Classic, DaVinci Resolve, After Effects, Premiere Pro, Unreal Engine, Cinema 4D, and V-Ray.

AMD Threadripper PRO 7000WX vs Intel Xeon W-3400 for Blender

CPU based rendering highly favors CPUs with high core counts. Xeon, Threadripper and Epyc are the go-to choices for any renderfarm or those building a workstation. However, there is more to consider than just the number of cores. Clock speed, IPC, and RAM speeds all play a part in how well a CPU performs in this task. While many users, especially in Blender, are moving to GPU for rendering due to its much faster performance, some still rely on CPU due to the limited memory available on video cards. Despite the incredible rendering speeds of GPUs, if your project can’t fit into the VRAM then you’ll still need to render on the CPU.

Starting with the new 96-core Threadripper PRO CPU, the 7995WX, there just isn’t any comparison. It scores double that of the top Intel CPU. Keep in mind, however, that it is nearly double the cost as well. The more interesting comparison is with the 64-core Threadripper Pro 7985WX. While the 7995WX has 50% more cores, it is only 27% faster. Scaling with more cores is never linear, but this is a bit lower than we’d hope for. 

The 64-core 7985WX is a closer match-up to the Intel 56-core w9-3495X, and here, the Threadripper PRO scores 72% higher. While it is also more expensive (roughly 25% more), that extra cost brings even more performance for the money. 

The 32-core Threadripper 7975WX is price comparable to the Xeon w9-3475X 36-core, though the Xeon has 4 more cores. Not only did the Threadripper PRO CPU outperform this similarly priced Xeon by 38%, it even managed to tie the top-of-the-line, 56-core w9-3495X. 

Moving down to the 24-core Threadripper 7965WX, it routinely outperformed the 24-core Xeon w7-2495, though it is roughly 20% more expensive. On average, it is around 40% faster, so that extra cost does give even greater performance. 

AMD Threadripper PRO 7000WX vs AMD Threadripper PRO 5000WX for Blender

When comparing the new AMD Threadripper 7000 CPUs to the previous generation, we must consider the price increase we see across the board, as the prices have increased from 10 to 18% for these CPUs. For this article, we are only comparing based on CPU price, but keep in mind that motherboard and RAM differences will also affect the final purchase price of a system.

Starting with the 64-core (since the 96-core did not have a similar CPU last generation), we see a 13% price increase, with 44% faster rendering performance. Meanwhile, the 32-core 7975WX scored 33% higher while being 18% more expensive than the 5975WX. Lastly, the 24-core 7965WX sees an improvement of 32% with a 10% increase in price.  

Overall, this is a great improvement over the previous generation. While prices did go up, the performance uplift is even greater, resulting in more performance for your dollar. In all tests, Threadripper holds a significant lead over the competing Intel Xeon processors. 

How Well Do the AMD Threadripper PRO 7000WX CPUs Perform in Blender?

Many artists in search of an optimal CPU rendering workstation have found AMD’s Threadripper CPUs to be their go-to choice. The rendering times achieved with these processors are consistently 30-46% faster than the previous generation, solidifying the Threadripper’s dominance. This notable improvement is attributed to a combination of architectural enhancements in the CPU and the upgrade to faster DDR5, both contributing significantly to the acceleration of rendering processes.

In every instance, the Threadripper PRO 7000WX CPUs outperform their Intel Xeon counterparts. This advantage is notable across various scenarios, showcasing the Threadripper’s superior performance. Despite the higher upfront cost associated with most Threadripper PRO 7000WX models, especially when compared to Intel CPUs with similar core counts, the investment pays off with significantly heightened rendering performance.

For many users, the only real comparison to the Threadripper Pro 7000WX CPUs will be the non-pro Threadripper 7000 Series. Many Blender users won’t need the extra PCIe lanes if they aren’t doing GPU rendering, 8-channel memory, or other platform features. Check out our AMD Threadripper 7000 vs AMD Threadripper PRO 7000WX for Content Creation article to see how these CPUs and their platforms compare. 

Every application uniquely utilizes hardware, so our results here don’t necessarily translate to any other application. Our focus in this article centers specifically on Threadripper PRO 7000WX’s performance in Blender. However, we recommend checking out our AMD Ryzen Threadripper 7000 Content Creation Review article, which includes a broad overview of results for several different applications. If you use other software packages, it also has links to our in-depth testing articles for content creation: Photoshop, Lightroom Classic, After Effects, DaVinci Resolve, Cinema 4D, Unreal Engine, and V-Ray.

---

Finding the perfect workstation doesn’t have to be complicated. Explore our solutions page for a curated selection of recommended systems for a multitude of applications and workflows, or visit our custom configuration page if you already know the ideal hardware for your needs. If you need assistance with tailoring a system to a unique workflow or have any other questions, we encourage you to reach out to our dedicated technology consultants.