We have already seen the results of a number of tests of the new AMD Ryzen Threadripper 7000 processors, but only now the ban on publishing reviews has lifted, and a lot of relevant materials have appeared on the Internet.

Almost all tests concern regular Threadripper 7000, where the 64-core Threadripper 7980X is the flagship.

It makes sense to compare new CPUs with their predecessors, since the number of cores is identical. But from Intel’s point of view, there is actually only the Xeon W9-3495X, which was a competitor to the Threadripper 5000, and it is very difficult for it to compete with new products. In addition, the sources are compared with regular consumer CPUs from AMD and Intel.

Of course, as always, when it comes to modern processors with a large number of cores, it is best to look at those tasks that are of interest to a particular user. Generally speaking, the variation across different applications can be large. However, in any case, the top 64-core Threadripper 7980X is the most productive in its category, sometimes outperforming its closest competitors by 30% or more. For example, in Cinebench R23 the new product is 33% faster than the Intel flagship, and even the 32-core Threadripper 7970X is only 10% behind the 56-core Xeon. In Handbrake, the Threadripper 7980X is 60% faster than the Xeon W9-3495X.

Even more impressive is the fact that the 32-core Threadripper 7970X sometimes manages to outperform the 64-core Threadripper 5995WX! In such tasks, the new 64-core CPU is almost twice as fast as the old one! Considering that the Threadripper 5000 itself was super-efficient, this is some kind of incredible achievement on the part of AMD.

In games, new products are usually much worse than regular Ryzen 7000s, although there are exceptions. But in general, as always, Threadripper is not a gaming processor at all.

Against the backdrop of monstrous performance, the issue of energy consumption arises. And here AMD surprises again: 64 Zen 4 cores, it turns out, under load, consume at the level of the Core i9-13900KS and slightly less than the Core i9-14900K! And that same Xeon consumes 36% more.