AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series Content Creation Review

Introduction

While the AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series processors technically launched back in March, they started out as a Lenovo exclusive, only being available for purchase as a part of their workstations. Recently, however, AMD officially announced that the Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series will be available from a number of other system integrators – including ourselves here at Puget Systems – starting in July 2022, and to the larger DIY community later this year.

Today, we have the opportunity to put a number of these new CPUs through their paces, specifically to see how they perform in content creation workflows like video editing, photography, rendering, and game development.

In terms of the basic specs that most people will be familiar with, the biggest difference between the Threadripper PRO 3000WX and the new 5000WX series is a small bump in the maximum boost clock of .2-.3GHz. This alone should often give them a small 5% increase in performance, but there are a number of other improvements under the hood that contribute to making the 5000WX series much faster than the previous generation.

One of the biggest changes with the Threadripper PRO 5000 WX processors is that they are based on the newer "Zen 3" architecture, which has a host of advancements over the previous "Zen 2" architecture. According to AMD, some of the biggest changes with Zen 3 are:

• Up to 19% higher IPC (instructions per clock)
• Lower latency
• Better efficiency
• 2x the L3 cache accessible per core (32MB L3 shared cache vs 16MB)
• ISA (Instruction Set Architecture) expansion

Many of these are fairly technical, and unless you have fairly deep knowledge of how CPUs work, may not mean all that much to you. But, what is important is that each makes their own contribution to making the 5000WX series the fastest workstations processors we have ever tested.

Beyond the move to Zen 3, the rest of the Threadripper Pro platform hasn't changed much from the previous generation. The 5000WX series is fully compatible with the existing WRX80 chipset and motherboards, maintains support for a massive 128 PCIe 4.0 lanes, and can use up to 2TB of DDR4-3200 Reg. ECC RAM across 8 channels. While we hesitate to say "no one will ever need more than 128 PCIe lanes and 2TB of RAM", this should be more than enough for the vast majority of users for the foreseeable future.

Test Setup

Listed below are the specifications of the systems we will be using for our testing:

*Latest drivers, OS updates, BIOS, and firmware as of June 15th, 2022

In order to see how the new AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series processors perform in content creation applications, we will be looking at the 24, 32, and 64 core models compared to a spread of CPUs from the previous generation Threadripper PRO 3000 WX-Series, along with Intel's current Xeon W-3300 series of processors.

In addition, we will also be throwing the consumer-grade Intel Core i9 12900K into the mix. This CPU is absolutely not in the same class as Threadripper PRO or Xeon W as it has a much lower core count, far fewer PCIe lanes, and only supports up to 128GB of dual-channel RAM. However, the 12900K can actually be as fast – or even faster – in some workflows due to its high per-core performance and special technologies like Quick Sync, so it will be a great reference point for how the Threadripper Pro 5000 WX-Series performs in a wide range of applications and workflows.

For the tests themselves, we will be primarily using our PugetBench series of benchmarks using the latest versions of the host applications. Most of these benchmarks include the ability to upload the results to our online database, so if you want to know how your own system compares, you can download and run the benchmark yourself. Our testing is also supplemented with a number of benchmarks directly from the software developers for applications like Cinema4D, Blender, and V-Ray.

Adobe Premiere Pro

In Adobe Premiere Pro, the new AMD Threadripper Pro 5000 WX-Series are anywhere from 7-23% faster overall compared to the previous generation Threadripper Pro 3000 WX-Series, and 10-20% faster than the Intel Xeon W-3300 series.

The biggest winner is the 5965WX 24 Core, which is about 20% faster than both the 3955WX 16 Core and the Intel Xeon W-3345 24 Core. The 5965WX has an inherent advantage compared to the 3955WX since it has 8 additional CPU cores, but the performance relative to Xeon W is in large part due to the improved "Zen 3" architecture.

For the 5975WX 32 Core, you are looking at a smaller 5% increase in performance over the 3975WX 32 Core. This almost entirely comes from a 10% increase in performance in our export tests, with very few gains to be found for live playback. At the 64 core mark, the new 5995WX is about 10% faster overall than the 3995WX, again with most of that coming from a 15% increase in exporting performance.

Something to make note of is that while the new 5000WX series is faster than the previous generation, for most of the Premiere Pro workflows we tested, there wasn't a significant performance difference between the 24, 32, and 64 core models. In fact, the overall scores for each CPU were within just 2% of each other, which is well within the margin of error for these tests.

If you want a closer look at our analysis of our Premiere Pro testing (including an explanation for why the consumer-grade Intel Core i9 12900K scores higher than these workstation-class CPUs), we recommend checking out our full analysis linked below:

Full Analysis: Adobe Premiere Pro: AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series vs Intel Xeon W-3300

Adobe After Effects

Before we get into our results for After Effects, we want to point out that the chart above is using the "High Performance" Windows power profile. Using this profile gives the AMD Threadripper CPUs on average a small ~5% bump in After Effects performance, but the 5975WX 32 core and 5995WX 64 core saw a much larger 20-25% performance increase specifically for the Multi-Core Score. The Intel Xeon W-3300 series saw even larger performance gains, at times giving up to 40%, or even 70%, higher performance!

For the average After Effects user, while the new Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series is significantly faster than both the previous generation 3000 WX-Series and the Intel Xeon W-3300, we want to point out that you likely wouldn't see much of a difference between the 24, 32, and 64 core models. However, if you are investing in Threadripper PRO, you are probably working with heavier and more complex projects than the average user. And in that case, the new Threadripper PRO processors are likely to be significantly better than what is shown in our "Overall Score". Because of this, we are also including the results for the "Multi-Core" portion of our benchmark (chart #2), which is designed to showcase performance for complex compositions that are best able to take advantage of the recently added MFR (multi-frame rendering) feature.

Starting with the 24 core 5965WX, we saw about a 25% increase in performance over the 3955WX 16 Core, partially due to the higher core count. The additional cores also allow the 5965WX to see a massive increase in performance for more complex projects that leverage the recent MFR feature to a greater degree, resulting in a huge 80% performance gap between the two CPUs. Compared to the Intel Xeon W-3345 24 Core, AMD again comes out on top, this time by about 22%. Since the core counts are equivalent, AMD doesn't have as much of a lead in our "Multi-Core Score", but the 5965WX is still a solid 30% faster for that kind of project.

Moving up to the 5975WX 32 Core, it averaged about 15% faster than the previous generation 3975WX 32 Core, with a 45% increase in performance for complex compositions. It also fares well again the Intel Xeon W-3365, coming in at 20% faster overall, and 40% faster for complex compositions.

Finally, the 5995WX 64 Core is actually a bit slower overall than the other two TR PRO models, but still shows a large 27% performance increase over the previous generation 3995WX. Our Multi-Core Score is one area where having 64 cores can give you a slight performance bump due to MFR, and for that, the 5995WX is nearly 70% faster than the previous generation.

If you want a closer look at our analysis of our After Effects testing, including how performance changes based on which Windows power profile is used, we recommend checking out our full analysis linked below:

Full Analysis: Adobe After Effects: AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series vs Intel Xeon W-3300

DaVinci Resolve Studio

DaVinci Resolve Studio is another application where we will be primarily looking at the results when using the "High Performance" Windows power profile. This only gives the AMD Threadripper CPUs a small ~5% bump in performance for the Fusion portion of our tests, but the Intel Xeon W-3300 series saw a massive 50-90% increase for those same tests. This is a large enough difference that we would argue that High Performance is almost a requirement when using the Xeon W CPUs for DaVinci Resolve.

We are going to stick to looking at the results in the "High Performance" mode since we are primarily concerned about RAW performance in this article, but be sure to check out our full analysis linked at the end of this section to see how things change in the "Balanced" profile. Using the higher profile does give better performance in some workloads, but it isn't without its drawbacks. The single biggest change is that it sets the "Minimum processor state" to 100% from a significantly lower value of 5%. This means that Windows won't attempt to ramp down your CPU when it isn't being used, resulting in higher temperatures, power draw, and system noise.

Some (perhaps many) users will take that tradeoff, but most people tend to want to have as quiet of a workstation as possible. So, right away, this gives Threadripper Pro an edge over the Xeon W line since you don't have to change from the Balanced power plan to get near peak performance.

Getting into the results themselves, similar to both Premiere Pro and After Effects, the first thing we want to point out is that there isn't much of a difference between the new Threadripper Pro 5000WX series' 24, 32, and 64 core models. The 64 Core 5995WX has a slight performance lead for GPU Effects and when processing some media, but the 32 core 5975WX, and to a slightly larger degree the 5965WX 24 core, hold a small lead for the Fusion portion of our benchmark. It averages out to be similar overall performance across all three models, so most users will likely want to stick with the 24 or 32 core model rather than investing in the 64 core 5995WX.

Comparing these new CPUs to both the previous generation and the Intel Xeon W-3300 series, let's again start with the 24 core 5965WX. This CPU ended up about 15% faster than the 3965WX 16 Core, although it has a slight advantage simply due to the increased core count. Versus the similar core count Xeon W-3345, the 5975WX doesn't have quite as large of a lead, but it is still about 10% faster overall.

At the 32 core mark, the 5975WX averaged about 7% faster than both the previous generation 3975WX 32 Core CPU as well as the Intel Xeon W-3365. The 5995WX 64 Core sees even less of a performance gain over the previous generation, only coming in at about 5% faster than the 3995WX. Most of that comes about from the Fusion portion of our benchmark, while the 4K/8K Media and GPU Effect portions of our benchmark were within the margin of error.

If you want a closer look at our analysis of our DaVinci Resolve testing (including analysis of the different Windows power profiles, and where the differences are larger between each CPU), we recommend checking out our full analysis linked below:

Full Analysis: DaVinci Resolve Studio: AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series vs Intel Xeon W-3300

Adobe Photoshop

Photoshop is an interesting application to look at because it really is not the best match for workstation-class CPUs like the Threadripper Pro 5000 WX-Series. As you can see in the chart above, the consumer-grade Intel Core i9 12900K is measurably faster than every workstation CPU, coming in at 7% faster than even the fastest workstation CPU we tested – and at a fraction the price.

Workstation CPUs do have inherent benefits for some Photoshop workflows (most notably their insane RAM capacity), but very few people are going to be purchasing a Threadripper PRO just for Photoshop. More likely, they are using an application like After Effects and may be using Photoshop in a secondary role. Because of this, we like to look at Photoshop in more of a secondary sense, primarily checking to make sure there are no unexpected performance issues.

With the new Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series processors, there are certainly no problems with performance in Photoshop. The increased maximum boost clock and architecture improvements result in some great performance gains over the previous generation, with the new models being around 20% faster. This extends to the Intel Xeon W-3300 line as well, with the 5000WX series again averaging just under 20% faster on average.

This is just a quick look at our Photoshop results, and if you want a more in-depth analysis, we recommend reading our full review linked below:

Full Analysis: Adobe Photoshop: AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series vs Intel Xeon W-3300

Adobe Lightroom Classic

For many users, Threadripper PRO is complete overkill for Lightroom Classic. For power users, on the other hand, there are some performance benefits – particularly for passive tasks like exporting and generating previews. In order to get the best performance for these tasks, however, you will often want to use the "High Performance" power profile, which is what we are showing in the charts above.

The first thing we want to point out is that, like the previous generation 3995WX, Lightroom Classic doesn't handle the new 5995WX 64 Core very well. Not only is the 5995WX nearly 20% slower than the 5975WX and 5965WX, but it is even slightly behind the consumer-grade Intel Core i9 12900K in almost every test.

Luckily, the other two Threadripper Pro models don't seem to have this issue with performance. There isn't a large difference between the 5965WX 24 Core and the 5975WX 32 Core, however, so even if you are looking for the absolute best performance in Lightroom Classic, you might as well save a bit of your budget and stick to the 24 core model.

Compared to the previous generation, the 5965WX 24 Core is around 30% faster than the 3955WX 16 Core, or about 20% faster than the higher core count 3975WX 32 Core. This performance gain is mostly from passive tasks like exporting, where the 5965WX is 20% and 40% faster than the 3955WX and 3975WX respectively.

Versus the Intel Xeon W-3300 series, the 5965WX fares even better. Against the W-3345 24 Core and W-3365 32 Core, you are looking at about a 30% performance lead overall. Once again, this largely comes from passive tasks, where the 5965WX is over 40% faster than any of the Intel Xeon W-3300 CPUs.

This is just a quick look at how the new Threadripper PRO CPUs fare in Lightroom Classic. If you want a more detailed analysis, we recommend checking out our full article:

Full Analysis: Adobe Lightroom Classic: AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series vs Intel Xeon W-3300

V-Ray

Moving on to the first of our CPU-based rendering tests, it is worth pointing out that AMD’s Threadripper PRO line has long been the best choice for performance. This new generation of CPUs widens AMD’s lead even further, with rendering scores increasing by 25% or more over the previous generation.

Since Intel Xeon W doesn't have anywhere near the total core count as Threadripper PRO, they will always be behind AMD in terms of the top score. However, even at similar core counts, the new Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series can be more than 40% faster than their Intel equivalent, making AMD the clear choice if you are looking for the fastest CPU for V-Ray.

No matter what CPU you are currently using, this new generation of Threadripper Pro CPUs is truly something V-Ray users can get excited about.

Full Analysis: V-Ray: AMD Threadripper Pro 5000 WX-Series vs Intel Xeon W-3300

Cinema 4D

Moving on to our Cinema 4D testing, AMD’s new Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series CPUs again show good improvements in both single and multi-core performance. Multithreaded scores increased by roughly 16% over the previous generation, while single-threaded scores jumped as much as 19%.

Similar to our V-Ray results, Threadripper PRO 5000WX is again significantly faster than the Intel Xeon W-3300 line, coming in at over 40% faster in terms of multi-core performance. The gap closes a bit for single-core performance, but even there, the new Threadripper PRO CPUs maintain just over a 20% performance lead.

The increase in both multi-core and single-core performance makes the new Threadripper PRO CPUs a great option for users that need both single-core performance for modeling and animating, and also great CPU rendering performance.

Full Analysis: Cinema 4D: AMD Threadripper Pro 5000 WX-Series vs Intel Xeon W-3300

Blender

For Blender, some tasks want a few fast cores, while others want lots of cores. The new Threadripper Pro 5000WX-Series CPUs from AMD didn’t increase the total number of cores available but did make them much faster.

Because of this, rendering scores increased by roughly 15% over the previous generation, which makes an already great CPU for rendering even better. And, just like the other CPU rendering benchmarks we have run, the new Threadripper Pro 5000WX line only furthers AMD's lead over Intel, with the 32 and 24 core models coming in at over 40% faster than their Xeon W equivalents.

While single-threaded tasks aren’t measured in this benchmark, we have seen as much as 19% improvement in this area. Combining these results, AMD’s new Threadripper Pro 5000WX-Series CPUs make for a great option for anyone looking for ultimate performance in Blender.

Full Analysis: Blender: AMD Threadripper Pro 5000 WX-Series vs Intel Xeon W-3300

Unreal Engine

For Unreal Engine development tasks, core count is king. AMD was already the top choice in both the workstation-class CPUs with their Threadripper PRO 3000WX-Series, as well as in the consumer-class CPUs with their Ryzen 9 5950X. With the Threadripper Pro 5000WX-Series, they managed to further that lead by 12-15% over the previous generation across all Unreal Engine tasks.

This only furthers AMD's lead over the Intel Xeon W line, with the 32 and 24 core models coming in at 35-45% faster than Xeon W, and the 64 core 5995WX offering additional performance beyond that.

For users looking for the absolute fastest compile times, AMD’s Threadripper PRO 5000WX-Series is clearly the best option.

Full Analysis: Unreal Engine: AMD Threadripper Pro 5000 WX-Series vs Intel Xeon W-3300

Are the AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series processors good for Content Creation?

Overall, the new AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series processors are terrific for a wide range of content creation applications. Across the board, they are anywhere from moderately to significantly faster than the previous generation Threadripper PRO 3000 WX-Series, and handily beat their main competition from Intel: the Xeon W-3300 series. Even better, unlike the Xeon W line, the 5000WX processors rarely needed to use the "High Performance" power profile in order to get the best performance.

Like any CPU, however, it is very important to know just how each CPU model will perform in the applications you use every day to ensure that you are making the best investment possible. Workflows that are highly threaded like CPU rendering and many game dev. tasks see very nice performance improvements as you upgrade from the 5965WX 24 Core, to the 5975WX 32 Core, and all the way up to the 5995WX 64 Core.

Others – like Premiere Pro, After Effects, and DaVinci Resolve – don't see much of a difference between the three new Threadripper PRO models.. They are all still a good amount faster than any other workstation-class CPU currently on the market, but you are often better off saving your budget and getting the 5965WX 24 Core rather than investing in the higher core count models. Sometimes you can get a small increase in performance with more cores, but often you would end up with greater overall system performance if you took the savings and invested it in other system improvements like more RAM, faster storage, or a faster GPU.

And in a few cases like Photoshop and Lightroom Classic, going up in core count can actually result in worse performance. This isn't any fault of AMD, but simply an artifact of how certain applications are coded and how boost works on modern CPUs. All the new Threadripper PRO CPUs may have the same maximum boost clock of 4.5GHz, but because of how boost scaling works, the lower core count models tend to run at a slightly higher frequency when only a handful of cores are being used.

All this really means is that you have to do a bit of research before deciding which Threadripper PRO model is right for your workflow. We are long past the days where you can just throw money at the problem and always expect to get better performance in every application, which is one of the big reasons why we continue to develop our benchmarks to test real-world workflows in applications that are used across the world.

If you are interested in a workstation with the new Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series, availability for us is expected sometime in July 2022, although we always hold off on adding a new product to our workstation line until it has fully passed our qualification process and supply is solid. If you want to be notified when this process has been completed and we will have Threadripper PRO 5000WX workstations available, we recommend filling out the form on our AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series landing page. Many of our Content Creation Workstations will also be updated to these new processors as soon as we are able to offer them to our customers.