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 PRO 3975WX

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +20.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 96 MB).
✅Costs $228 less on MSRP ($1,337 MSRP vs $1,565 MSRP).
✅Delivers 18.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 46.6 vs 39.2 PassMark/$ ($1,337 MSRP vs $1,565 MSRP).
✅45.5% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 88) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌36.6% higher power demand at 280W vs 205W.
❌Older platform position on sWRX8 with DDR4, while Xeon 6710E moves to LGA4710 and DDR5.
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Xeon 6710E

2024

Why buy it

✅Draws 205W instead of 280W, a 75W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA4710 with DDR5 support instead of sWRX8 and DDR4.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (10,400 vs 25,211).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (96 MB vs 128 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 39.2 vs 46.6 PassMark/$ ($1,565 MSRP vs $1,337 MSRP).

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX

2020

Xeon 6710E

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +20.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 96 MB).
✅Costs $228 less on MSRP ($1,337 MSRP vs $1,565 MSRP).
✅Delivers 18.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 46.6 vs 39.2 PassMark/$ ($1,337 MSRP vs $1,565 MSRP).
✅45.5% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 88) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅Draws 205W instead of 280W, a 75W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA4710 with DDR5 support instead of sWRX8 and DDR4.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌36.6% higher power demand at 280W vs 205W.
❌Older platform position on sWRX8 with DDR4, while Xeon 6710E moves to LGA4710 and DDR5.
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (10,400 vs 25,211).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (96 MB vs 128 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 39.2 vs 46.6 PassMark/$ ($1,565 MSRP vs $1,337 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX better than Xeon 6710E?

Yes. Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 20.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 142.4% better Geekbench multi-core, and 1.4% higher PassMark, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 20.8% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is the better fit. You are getting 142.4% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 32 cores and 64 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 96 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is the smarter buy today. Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is $228 cheaper on MSRP at $1,337 MSRP versus $1,565 MSRP, and it gives you a 20.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 18.7% better value on MSRP (46.6 vs 39.2 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Xeon 6710E is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2020), a healthier platform with LGA4710 and DDR5 instead of sWRX8, and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

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.

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX Benchmark Check

Xeon 6710E Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX	Xeon 6710E
1080p
low	183 FPS	189 FPS
medium	149 FPS	152 FPS
high	126 FPS	121 FPS
ultra	98 FPS	95 FPS
1440p
low	160 FPS	153 FPS
medium	127 FPS	119 FPS
high	101 FPS	91 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	73 FPS
4K
low	73 FPS	71 FPS
medium	61 FPS	59 FPS
high	48 FPS	46 FPS
ultra	40 FPS	38 FPS

Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX Open Xeon 6710E

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX	Xeon 6710E
1080p
low	579 FPS	437 FPS
medium	499 FPS	378 FPS
high	383 FPS	306 FPS
ultra	327 FPS	241 FPS
1440p
low	485 FPS	359 FPS
medium	425 FPS	319 FPS
high	338 FPS	266 FPS
ultra	274 FPS	203 FPS
4K
low	304 FPS	222 FPS
medium	270 FPS	201 FPS
high	231 FPS	168 FPS
ultra	202 FPS	135 FPS

Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX Open Xeon 6710E

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX	Xeon 6710E
1080p
low	681 FPS	934 FPS
medium	564 FPS	831 FPS
high	497 FPS	779 FPS
ultra	425 FPS	693 FPS
1440p
low	570 FPS	746 FPS
medium	479 FPS	655 FPS
high	424 FPS	614 FPS
ultra	364 FPS	546 FPS
4K
low	417 FPS	479 FPS
medium	333 FPS	378 FPS
high	293 FPS	334 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	272 FPS

Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX Open Xeon 6710E

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX	Xeon 6710E
1080p
low	1020 FPS	918 FPS
medium	917 FPS	830 FPS
high	765 FPS	715 FPS
ultra	664 FPS	610 FPS
1440p
low	802 FPS	710 FPS
medium	701 FPS	620 FPS
high	584 FPS	530 FPS
ultra	496 FPS	450 FPS
4K
low	559 FPS	509 FPS
medium	504 FPS	455 FPS
high	437 FPS	400 FPS
ultra	373 FPS	344 FPS

Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX Open Xeon 6710E

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX and Xeon 6710E

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX

The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2020-07-14. It is based on the Matisse (2019−2020) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: sWRX8. Thermal design power (TDP): 280 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 62,261 points. Launch price was $4,499.

Xeon 6710E

The Xeon 6710E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 June 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Sierra Forest (2024) architecture. It features 64 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 96 MB (total). L2 cache: 4 MB (per module). Built on Intel 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4710. Thermal design power (TDP): 205 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 61,404 points. Launch price was $2,749.

⚡

Processing Power

The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX packs 32 cores / 64 threads, while the Xeon 6710E offers 64 cores / 64 threads — the Xeon 6710E has 32 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.2 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX versus 3.2 GHz on the Xeon 6710E — a 27% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX (base: 3.5 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX uses the Matisse (2019−2020) architecture (7 nm, 12 nm), while the Xeon 6710E uses Sierra Forest (2024) (Intel 3 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX scores 62,261 against the Xeon 6710E's 61,404 — a 1.4% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,260 vs 1,225, a 2.8% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 25,211 vs 10,400 (83.2% advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX). L3 cache: 128 MB on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX vs 96 MB (total) on the Xeon 6710E.

Feature	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX	Xeon 6710E
Cores / Threads	32 / 64	64 / 64+100%
Boost Clock	4.2 GHz+31%	3.2 GHz
Base Clock	3.5 GHz+46%	2.4 GHz
L3 Cache	128 MB+33%	96 MB (total)
L2 Cache	512K (per core)	4 MB (per module)+700%
Process	7 nm, 12 nm	Intel 3 nm-57%
Architecture	Matisse (2019−2020)	Sierra Forest (2024)
PassMark	62,261+1%	61,404
Cinebench R23 Multi	42,986	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,260+3%	1,225
Geekbench 6 Multi	25,211+142%	10,400

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX uses the sWRX8 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon 6710E uses LGA4710 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-3200 on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX versus DDR5-5600 on the Xeon 6710E — the Xeon 6710E supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon 6710E supports up to 4096 GB of RAM compared to 2048 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 8-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 128 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX) vs 88 (Xeon 6710E) — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX offers 40 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD WRX80 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX) and C741 (Xeon 6710E).

Feature	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX	Xeon 6710E
Socket	sWRX8	LGA4710
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-3200	DDR5-5600+25%
Max RAM Capacity	2048 GB	4096 GB+100%
RAM Channels	8	8
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+45%	88

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Xeon 6710E supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: true (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX) vs VT-x, VT-d (Xeon 6710E). Primary use case: Xeon 6710E targets High Efficiency Server. Direct competitor: Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX rivals Xeon W-3375; Xeon 6710E rivals EPYC 9534.

Feature	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX	Xeon 6710E
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	Yes	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	true	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	—	High Efficiency Server

💰

Value Analysis

The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX launched at $1337 MSRP, while the Xeon 6710E debuted at $1565. On MSRP ($1337 vs $1565), the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX is $228 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX delivers 46.6 pts/$ vs 39.2 pts/$ for the Xeon 6710E — making the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3975WX the 17.1% better value option.