Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
Popular choices:
Xeon Gold 6154
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
About PassMark
PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
2017Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +11.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+29.3% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 25 MB).
- ✅Draws 180W instead of 200W, a 20W reduction.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $999 MSRP, while Xeon Gold 6154 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Xeon Gold 6154
2017Why buy it
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper 1950X across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (27,457 vs 27,487).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (25 MB vs 32 MB).
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
2017Xeon Gold 6154
2017Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +11.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+29.3% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 25 MB).
- ✅Draws 180W instead of 200W, a 20W reduction.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Why buy it
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $999 MSRP, while Xeon Gold 6154 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper 1950X across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (27,457 vs 27,487).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (25 MB vs 32 MB).
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen Threadripper 1950X better than Xeon Gold 6154?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X | Xeon Gold 6154 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 198 FPS | 181 FPS |
| medium | 172 FPS | 145 FPS |
| high | 141 FPS | 119 FPS |
| ultra | 110 FPS | 92 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 155 FPS | 147 FPS |
| medium | 129 FPS | 115 FPS |
| high | 103 FPS | 93 FPS |
| ultra | 80 FPS | 72 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 69 FPS | 68 FPS |
| medium | 61 FPS | 57 FPS |
| high | 48 FPS | 45 FPS |
| ultra | 37 FPS | 36 FPS |
Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X | Xeon Gold 6154 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 407 FPS | 398 FPS |
| medium | 365 FPS | 345 FPS |
| high | 311 FPS | 290 FPS |
| ultra | 259 FPS | 242 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 348 FPS | 345 FPS |
| medium | 318 FPS | 306 FPS |
| high | 272 FPS | 258 FPS |
| ultra | 224 FPS | 214 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 224 FPS | 223 FPS |
| medium | 204 FPS | 198 FPS |
| high | 185 FPS | 178 FPS |
| ultra | 150 FPS | 146 FPS |
League of Legends
| Preset | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X | Xeon Gold 6154 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 687 FPS | 686 FPS |
| medium | 687 FPS | 686 FPS |
| high | 687 FPS | 686 FPS |
| ultra | 687 FPS | 686 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 687 FPS | 686 FPS |
| medium | 687 FPS | 624 FPS |
| high | 656 FPS | 594 FPS |
| ultra | 584 FPS | 529 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 519 FPS | 465 FPS |
| medium | 428 FPS | 363 FPS |
| high | 383 FPS | 325 FPS |
| ultra | 321 FPS | 265 FPS |
Valorant
| Preset | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X | Xeon Gold 6154 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 687 FPS | 686 FPS |
| medium | 687 FPS | 686 FPS |
| high | 687 FPS | 678 FPS |
| ultra | 640 FPS | 590 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 687 FPS | 686 FPS |
| medium | 687 FPS | 609 FPS |
| high | 611 FPS | 526 FPS |
| ultra | 510 FPS | 452 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 578 FPS | 481 FPS |
| medium | 517 FPS | 429 FPS |
| high | 458 FPS | 384 FPS |
| ultra | 382 FPS | 334 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and Xeon Gold 6154
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
The Ryzen Threadripper 1950X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 August 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Zen (2017−2020) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3r2. Thermal design power (TDP): 180 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Quad-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 27,487 points. Launch price was $999.
Xeon Gold 6154
Xeon Gold 6154
The Xeon Gold 6154 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 July 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (server) (2017−2018) architecture. It features 18 cores and 36 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 24.75 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 200 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 27,457 points. Launch price was $3,543.
Processing Power
The Ryzen Threadripper 1950X packs 16 cores / 32 threads, while the Xeon Gold 6154 offers 18 cores / 36 threads — the Xeon Gold 6154 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X versus 3.7 GHz on the Xeon Gold 6154 — a 7.8% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X (base: 3.4 GHz vs 3 GHz). The Ryzen Threadripper 1950X uses the Zen (2017−2020) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon Gold 6154 uses Skylake (server) (2017−2018) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X scores 27,487 against the Xeon Gold 6154's 27,457 — a 0.1% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X. L3 cache: 32 MB on the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X vs 24.75 MB (total) on the Xeon Gold 6154.
| Feature | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X | Xeon Gold 6154 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 16 / 32 | 18 / 36+13% |
| Boost Clock | 4 GHz+8% | 3.7 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.4 GHz+13% | 3 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 32 MB+29% | 24.75 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 512K (per core) | 1 MB (per core)+100% |
| Process | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Architecture | Zen (2017−2020) | Skylake (server) (2017−2018) |
| PassMark | 27,487 | 27,457 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,040 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 9,000 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Ryzen Threadripper 1950X uses the SP3r2 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon Gold 6154 uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X | Xeon Gold 6154 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | SP3r2 | LGA3647 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 4.0+33% | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 256 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 4 | — |
| ECC Support | Yes | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 64 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: AMD-V (Ryzen Threadripper 1950X) / not specified (Xeon Gold 6154). Primary use case: Ryzen Threadripper 1950X targets Workstation.
| Feature | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X | Xeon Gold 6154 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | — |
| Unlocked | Yes | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | — |
| Target Use | Workstation | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Ryzen Threadripper 1950X and Xeon Gold 6154
