Table of Contents
TL;DR: AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series performance in DaVinci Resolve Studio
The new AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series processors may not see as large of performance gains in DaVinci Resolve as they do in some other applications, but they are still a measurable 5-10% faster than the previous generation. Much of the gains over the Threadripper PRO 3000 WX-Series came from our Fusion tests where the 5000WX series was around 10-15% faster.
Compared to their main competition from Intel – the Xeon W-3300 line – the 5000WX series maintain roughly a 7-10% performance lead. This is assuming you are using the "High Performance" power profile, which while giving a small bump in performance for Fusion tasks for the AMD CPUs, results in a tremendous 50-90% gain in those same tests for the Intel Xeon W processors. Even with this performance increase, the Fusion tests are where the new AMD Threadripper PRO CPUs have the biggest lead, coming in at roughly 10% faster than their Intel equivalents.
More than many of the other applications we regularly test here at Puget Systems, DaVinci Resolve Studio benefits heavily from workstation-class platforms like Threadripper PRO. Not only do higher core count CPUs and 8-channel RAM help with heavy RAW media, but the fact that it has 128 PCIe lanes makes it terrific for workflows that need multiple GPUs.
In many ways, the new AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series processors are a relatively straightforward upgrade to the previous 3000WX series. The total core count hasn't increased from 64 Cores, and since the new CPUs use the same WRX80 motherboards, they maintain the support for 8-channel memory and 128 PCIe Gen4 lanes. The biggest differences with the new models are two-fold: a slightly higher maximum boost frequency, and the move to the newer "Zen3" architecture which is supposed to bring about sizable performance increases across the board.
In this article, we will be using our PugetBench for DaVinci Resolve benchmark paired with DaVinci Resolve Studio 17.4.6 to examine the performance of the new AMD Threadripper PRO 5000WX CPUs. We will note that there are several beta versions of DaVinci Resolve Studio 18 currently available, but we tend to avoid betas for most of our performance testing since there are still being developed and performance may change. In any case, we have done some testing with the 18 beta, and from what we can tell, raw performance for the things our benchmark tests does not appear to be significantly different.
As a comparison for the new 5000WX series, we will be including the previous generation AMD Threadripper PRO 3000 WX-Series, as well as their primary competition – the Intel Xeon W-3300. In addition, we will also throw in the Intel Core i9 12900K. This consumer CPU is not at all in the same class as the Threadripper PRO and Xeon W lines, but it is actually among the fastest CPUs currently available for some Resolve workflows – most notably anything involving Fusion. Because of this, it will operate as a good comparison point for how well the Threadripper Pro 5000WX line compares in terms of pure performance with the much less expensive consumer lines.
If you want to read more about the new Threadripper PRO 5000-WX series and what sets them apart from the previous generation, we recommend checking out our main AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series Content Creation Review. That article includes testing results for a range of other applications including Premiere Pro, After Effects, Lightroom Classic, Photoshop, and Unreal Engine; and also has all the test setup details on the hardware and software side if you want more information on the individual specs for each system.
Raw Benchmark Data
While our benchmark presents various scores based on the performance of each test, we also like to provide individual results for you to examine. If there is a specific task that is a hindrance to your workflow, examining the raw results for that task is going to be much more applicable than the scores that our benchmark calculated.
Feel free to skip to the next sections for our analysis of these results to get a wider view of how each configuration performs.
Benchmark Analysis (Balanced Power Profile)
For a number of the applications we are looking at as a part of our greater Threadripper PRO 5000WX testing, we ended up having to test with two Windows power profiles: the default "Balanced" profile, as well as the "High Performance" power profile. Switching between the two profiles most often can give the Intel Xeon W line a solid boost in performance, and in the case of DaVinci Resolve, it gives the Xeon W line a massive 50-90% performance bump in our Fusion tests.
To kick off our DaVinci Resolve performance analysis, however, we are going to first look at the performance when using the default "Balanced" power profile:
Compared to the previous Threadripper PRO 3000WX processors, the new 5000WX models are around 5-15% faster overall in DaVinci Resolve. Most of this comes from increased performance in our Fusion tests (chart #5 above), but there are a few sizable gains in other areas.
Starting with the Threadripper Pro 5965WX 24 Core, this CPU saw the largest gains over the previous generation, coming in at 15% faster overall than the 3955WX 16 Core. In many ways, this is to be expected since it has 50% more CPU cores than the previous generation, and Resolve has a number of areas where those additional cores can make a difference. Because of this, the 15% performance gain was spread fairly evenly across the board, with our 4K, 8K, and Fusion tests all seeing a 15-20% increase in performance.
For the Threadripper Pro 5975WX 32 Core and 5995WX 64 Core, we are not getting additional cores, so the gains over the previous generation are a lot smaller. Compared to the 3975WX and 3995WX respectively, we are only looking at a 5-7% performance increase overall. The vast majority of this comes from our Fusion tests, where the new models are 10-15% faster. This is likely due in large part to the increased maximum boost clock (since Fusion is not terribly well threaded), as well as the move to the newer "Zen3" architecture. It isn't enough for these CPUs to match a consumer CPU like the Intel Core i9 12900K – which in many ways is the ideal CPU for Fusion – but it significantly closes the gap.
Comparing the new 5000WX series to the Intel Xeon W-3300 processors is a little bit unfair since the Intel CPUs take a pretty big performance hit in some areas when using the default "Balanced" Windows power profile. Still, this is likely what you would get out of the box, so it is still worth doing a quick analysis. Overall, the Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series are around 15-20% faster compared to the Intel Xeon W-3300 series, but this is almost entirely due to a 50-80% performance advantage in our Fusion tests. Performance for 4K/8K media and GPU effects are within a few percent across the two product lines.
As we mentioned, however, if you were going to use the Xeon W processors in your workstation, you would probably want to be using the "High Performance" power profile. So, let's take a look to see how they compare if we switch to that profile:
Benchmark Analysis (High Performance Power Profile)
Using the "High Performance" Windows power profile doesn't affect the new AMD Threadripper Pro 5000 WX-Series processors much beyond a small ~5% increase in performance for our Fusion tests, but it makes a massive difference for the Intel Xeon W-3300 CPUs. Performance for GPU effects gets a small bump, but most significant is a 50-90%(!) increase in performance for Fusion. This is almost a doubling of performance in some cases and will affect everything from VFX work to using Fusion-based titles and graphics.
Since the AMD Threadripper PRO CPUs were not largely affected, we are going to skip over talking about the 5000WX series compare to the previous generation and talk solely about AMD vs Intel.
Because of the huge bump in Fusion performance, the AMD Threadripper Pro 5000 WX-Series ended up being only about 10% faster overall compared to their Intel equivalents. Starting with the 5965WX 24 core, it was 16% faster in the 4K tests, and 10% faster for 8K and Fusion than the W-3345. That is a better result for Intel than with the "Balanced" power profile, but AMD definitely still holds a solid performance lead here.
At the 32 core mark, the 5975WX was 7% faster overall compared to the W-3365. This is mostly from the ~10% higher score for the 4K and Fusion tests, while the 8K score was only about 4% higher.
Overall, if you use the "High Performance" Windows power profile to get the most out of these CPUs, the gap narrows significantly between the AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series and the Intel Xeon W-3300. However, AMD definitely holds the performance lead, but it is only by about 10% or so overall.
AMD Threadripper PRO 5965WX vs 3955WX vs Intel Xeon W-3345
In most cases, the new AMD Threadripper PRO 5965WX 24 Core is measurably faster than both the previous generation Threadripper PRO 3955WX 16 Core and the Intel Xeon W-3345 24 Core. The 5965WX 24 Core does have more cores than the 3955WX 16 Core, but since the previous generation does not have a 24 core model, this is the closest comparison we are able to make across the two generations. In any case, with both the default "Balanced" Windows power profile and the "High Performance" profile, the 5965WX is overall around 15% faster than the 3955WX.
Compared to the Intel Xeon W-3345, the Threadripper Pro 5965WX is roughly 10% faster overall as long as you stick to the "High Performance" Windows power profile in order to get the most out of both CPUs.
AMD Threadripper PRO 5975WX vs 3975WX vs Intel Xeon W-3365
Like the 5965WX, the new AMD Threadripper PRO 5975WX 32 Core is faster than both the previous generation Threadripper PRO 3975WX 32 Core and the Intel Xeon W-3365 32 Core, although to a slightly lesser degree. With both the default "Balanced" Windows power profile and the "High Performance" profile, the 5975WX is roughly 7% faster than the 3975WX. Much of this comes from improved performance in our Fusion tests, with the difference for the 4K, 8K, and GPU Effects tests being less than 5%
Compared to the Intel Xeon W-3365, the Threadripper Pro 5975WX is also around 7% faster overall in DaVinci Resolve Studio when using the "High Performance" power profile. The biggest difference was in our 4K Media and Fusion tests, where the 5975WX was around 10% faster.
AMD Threadripper PRO 5995WX vs 3995WX
Higher core count CPUs like the new AMD Threadripper PRO 5995WX 64 Core and the previous generation Threadripper PRO 3995WX 64 Core are not often used for DaVinci Resolve Studio outside of the hardest RAW workflows, or those requiring 3+ GPUs.
However, in terms of raw performance, the new 5995WX is around 5% faster overall compared to the Threadripper PRO 3995WX, in large part due to a 11% increase in performance in our Fusion tests. In the 4K, 8K, and GPU Effects tests, the differences between the two CPUs was only about 3%, which is within the margin of error for this type of testing.
How well do AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series CPUs perform in Davinci Resolve?
The new AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series processors may not see as large of performance gains in DaVinci Resolve as they do in some other applications, but they are still a measurable 5-10% faster than the previous generation. Much of the gains over the Threadripper PRO 3000 WX-Series came from our Fusion tests where the 5000WX series was around 10-15% faster. Only the 5975WX 24 Core showed significant gains in our 4K and 8K Media tests, likely in large part due to its increase in core count compared to the 3955WX 16 Core.
Compared to their main competition from Intel – the Xeon W-3300 line – the 5000WX series maintain roughly a 7-10% performance lead. This is assuming you are using the "High Performance" power profile, which while giving a small bump in performance for Fusion tasks for the AMD CPUs, results in a tremendous 50-90% gain in those same tests for the Intel Xeon W processors. Even with this performance increase, the Fusion tests are where the new AMD Threadripper PRO CPUs have the biggest lead, coming in at roughly 10% faster than their Intel equivalents. For the other tests (4K/8K Media and GPU Effects), the difference between the Threadripper Pro 5000WX-Series and the Intel Xeon W-3300 series is typically within a few percent.
However, this is only focusing on raw performance in DaVinci Resolve Studio. AMD may not be massively faster than the Intel Xeon W processors for GPU Effects and many other tests, but as a platform, they have a number of advantages that give them an edge. Most significant is the fact that Threadripper Pro supports 128 PCIe Gen4 lanes, which means you can easily run up to four GPUs at fill x16 speeds and still have another 64 lanes for things like NVMe storage drives. Xeon W-3300, on the other hand, only supports 64 PCIe Gen4 lanes. That is technically enough for up to four x16 GPUs, but you have to start splitting lanes up if you want to use multiple NVMe storage drives in addition to those cards.
Overall, the new AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-series processors are a great option for high-end DaVinci Resolve Studio users. If your workflow needs more than 128GB of RAM, multiple GPUs, and the horsepower to crunch through RAW media, the Threadripper Pro 5000 WX-Series are likely the best choice currently available. They may not be worth upgrading to if you already have a previous generation Threadripper PRO 3000 WX-Series processor, but if you are upgrading from an older platform, they should give you a nice boost in performance.
Keep in mind that the benchmark results in this article are strictly for DaVinci Resolve Studio and that performance will vary widely in different applications. If your workflow includes other software packages, we highly recommend checking out our AMD Threadripper PRO 5000 WX-Series Content Creation Review article which includes results and links to in-depth testing for a range of other applications including Premiere Pro, After Effects, Photoshop, and Lightroom Classic.