Sure, but considering the things such a workstation might be used, I'd say the gap is closing between the segments.
The memory channel difference is a big one, and obviously that is not stressed fully by a rendering test like Cinebench as there's very little memory traffic involved.
For a workstation it's a matter of whether you need to pay the premium for extra pcie slots, ram and RDIMM or not.
It's kind of ok to do the comparison if all you care about is pure performance. But the comparison falls apart when you need to care about these other factors. And it doesn't make one cpu better than the other when one supports 2TB of ram and the other one "only" supports 190 something GBs, it's just that one cpu is built for something and the other one is built for something else. It's apples and oranges.
Thank you so much for these benchmarks. They really are for very specific use cases.
For Photoshop and Premier and Davinci: 16, 24, or 32 cores is really the sweet spot. Anything more gets negative results.
But for Unreal Engine, Blender, V-Ray, and Large Language Models, the 64 and 96 cores are significantly faster.
The 9955WX hardly scores higher than my 9950x3D in Cinebench - yet, it's 2-3x in price, not counting in the pricier mobo.
9955WX vs 9950x3D
148 , 144 and 128 of total, usable and 5.0 PCIe vs 28 and 24 of total and usable
8 vs 2 memory channels
RDIMM vs UDIMM
2TB vs 192GB of max RAM
And probably most important for this discussion:
Unspecified (but I'd say: servers) vs Enthusiast Desktop market segment
Both are good for their specific market segment and comparing them is moot unless the segments merge.
Sure, but considering the things such a workstation might be used, I'd say the gap is closing between the segments.
The memory channel difference is a big one, and obviously that is not stressed fully by a rendering test like Cinebench as there's very little memory traffic involved.
I mean, yeah?
For a workstation it's a matter of whether you need to pay the premium for extra pcie slots, ram and RDIMM or not.
It's kind of ok to do the comparison if all you care about is pure performance. But the comparison falls apart when you need to care about these other factors. And it doesn't make one cpu better than the other when one supports 2TB of ram and the other one "only" supports 190 something GBs, it's just that one cpu is built for something and the other one is built for something else. It's apples and oranges.