V-Ray: 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 affordable consumer-grade CPU.

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 Blender.

In addition, although all the new AMD CPUs have a TDP of 350 W, TDP is rarely the whole story. To see how much power these chips use to complete tasks, check out our Power Analysis: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 7000 article. That is specifically looking at the non-Pro models, but both Threadripper lines have the same power draw and can be considered interchangeable when it comes to CPU power draw and cooling.

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

CPU-based rendering highly favors CPUs with high core counts. Xeon, Threadripper, and Epyc are the go-to choices for any render farm or those building a workstation specifically for CPU rendering. 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 V-Ray users 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, you’ll still need to render on the CPU.

Starting with the new 96-core Threadripper PRO model, the 7995WX, there isn’t any comparison. It scores double that of the top Intel CPU, although keep in mind 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 26% faster. Scaling with more cores is never linear (the 7985WX 64-core has twice as many cores as the 7975WX 32-core, but it is only 70% faster), this is still a bit lower than we hoped. 

The 64-core 7985WX is a closer match to the Intel 56-core w9-3495X, where AMD scores 73% 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, though the Xeon has 4 more cores. Not only did the Threadripper outperform the similarly priced Xeon by 35%, but it is even tied 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. It is around 32% faster on average, so that extra cost gives even greater performance.

AMD Threadripper PRO 7000WX vs AMD Threadripper PRO 5000WX for V-Ray

When comparing the new AMD Threadripper 7000 CPUs to the previous generation, we must take into consideration the price increase we see across the board. The prices have gone up anywhere from 10-18%, just for the CPUs. For this article, we are only comparing based on CPU price, but 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 46% faster rendering performance. Meanwhile, the 32-core 7975WX scored 30% 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. You are still getting more performance for your dollar.

How Well Do the AMD Threadripper PRO 7000WX CPUs Perform in V-Ray?

In a head-to-head comparison, the Threadripper PRO 7000WX CPUs consistently outperform their Intel Xeon counterparts, establishing a clear performance advantage. 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.

One comparison of note, the midrange 32-core Threadripper 7975WX surpasses the capabilities of the top-of-the-line 56-core Intel Xeon w9-3495X, highlighting the Threadripper’s prowess. This performance advantage positions the Threadripper PRO 7000WX CPUs as a compelling choice for those prioritizing rendering efficiency.

For many users, the only real comparison to the Threadripper PRO 7000WX CPUs will be the non-pro Threadripper 7000 Series. Many V-Ray 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 V-Ray. 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 Blender.

---

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.