APEXX T4 PRO and APEXX W4: Benchmark Results Across Professional Workflows

APEXX T4 PRO and APEXX W4: Benchmark Overview

In most tested workloads, the APEXX T4 PRO posted higher results than the APEXX W4 at matched core counts across AEC, Media and Entertainment, and Design and Manufacturing, simulation, rendering, and software development workloads at matched core counts.

The clearest head-to-head comparisons were at 32 cores (AMD Ryzen™ Threadripper™ PRO 9975WX vs. Intel® Xeon® W 676X) and 24 cores (AMD Ryzen™ Threadripper™ PRO 9965WX vs. Intel® Xeon® W 658X). Both configurations, the T4 PRO led in the majority of tested categories.

Ansys Mechanical showed a different pattern. On several direct solver tasks, the W4 was competitive or led the T4 PRO. If structural simulation is the primary workload for your team, that distinction matters and is covered in detail below.

Comparing the APEXX T4 PRO and APEXX W4 Workstations

The APEXX T4 PRO is an AMD workstation built around the AMD® Ryzen™ Threadripper™ PRO 9000 WX-Series processor platform, available in configurations from 16 to 96 cores. It is designed for demanding multi-threaded professional workloads including rendering, simulation, large assembly work, and media production.

The APEXX W4 is built around the Intel® Xeon® W 600 Series processor platform, available in configurations from 18 to 86 cores. It is a strong platform for professional workflows that benefit from Intel's architecture, including certain simulation and engineering applications.

Both are mid-tower workstations configurable with professional GPUs, ECC memory, and enterprise-grade storage. At comparable configurations, the two systems are similarly priced. The performance difference between them is not a budget question. It is a workflow question.

How We Tested the APEXX T4 PRO and APEXX W4

We tested multiple configurations of both workstations across a broad set of professional benchmarks. The headline comparisons in this post focus on the most direct core-count matchups:

• 32-core: AMD Ryzen™ Threadripper™ PRO 9975WX vs. Intel® Xeon® W 676X
• 24-core: AMD Ryzen™ Threadripper™ PRO 9965WX vs. Intel® Xeon® W 658X

All systems were configured identically with:

• NVIDIA® RTX™ PRO 6000 GPU
• 512GB DDR5 ECC memory (8 x 64GB DDR5-6400 RDIMM)
• Samsung 990 PRO M.2 1TB NVMe SSD
• Windows® 11 25H2

Keeping the GPU, memory, and storage consistent across all configurations focused the comparison on the performance differences between the two processor platforms.

These results represent the tested configurations. Performance may vary based on software versions, project files, plugins, drivers, settings, and the complete system configuration.

AEC: APEXX T4 PRO vs. APEXX W4 Revit and AutoCAD Benchmark Results

For architects, engineers, and construction professionals, the two benchmarks that matter most are the Revit® 2026 RFO and the Cadalyst AutoCAD® 2026 benchmark.

The T4 PRO led every Revit category and nearly every AutoCAD category at matched 32-core configurations. The 3D Graphics and Total Index advantages are particularly significant for professionals working with complex models and large drawing sets.

The 24-core results (9965WX vs. Xeon 658X) told a similar story, with the APEXX T4 PRO leading across the same categories.

Media and Entertainment: APEXX T4 PRO and APEXX W4 Rendering and Production Benchmark Results

For rendering, motion graphics, and video production workflows, the results showed some of the clearest performance differences between the two processor platforms.

V-Ray CPU and GPU Benchmark Results 6.00.2

The CPU rendering difference is meaningful for teams doing CPU-based rendering in V-Ray. GPU scores were similar, which is expected given identical GPU configurations.

Adobe After Effects and Premiere Pro Benchmark Results (PugetBench)

The T4 PRO posted higher overall scores in both After Effects and Premiere Pro at matched core counts. In After Effects, the 2D, 3D, and tracking scores were all higher on the T4 PRO. Premiere Pro LongGOP, Intraframe, and RAW scores were also higher on the T4 PRO.

DaVinci Resolve Benchmark Results(PugetBench)

In DaVinci Resolve, the T4 PRO posted higher scores for Overall Score, LongGOP, Intraframe, RAW, and Fusion categories. GPU Effects scores were comparable given the matched GPU.

Corona Render Benchmark 10 and Cinebench 2026

Both single-thread and multi-thread Cinebench results were higher on the T4 PRO, along with the Corona Render results, showing higher performance at this core count across rendering workloads.

Design and Manufacturing: APEXX T4 PRO and APEXX W4 Performance

For engineering and design professionals running tools like PTC Creo, SOLIDWORKS, and Keyshot, the T4 PRO showed strong performance across graphics and CPU workloads.

SPECviewperf 15.0.2 4K Benchmark Results (4K)

The T4 PRO led every SPECviewperf viewset at the 32-core comparison. These are 3D graphics benchmarks that directly reflect the kind of viewport and display performance that design professionals experience in their daily work.

SPECapc for Creo 9.1.0 and Keyshot 2026

Both the CPU and GPU Composite Scores in SPECapc for Creo were higher on the T4 PRO at matched core counts. Keyshot CPU scores were also higher on the T4 PRO, while GPU scores were similar given identical GPU configurations.

SPECapc for SOLIDWORKS® 2025 (4K, FSAA)

The T4 PRO led both SOLIDWORKS composite scores at the 32-core matchup:

At the 32-core comparison, the APEXX T4 PRO led the APEXX W4 by 44% on CPU Composite and 37% on GPU Composite in SOLIDWORKS. For design and manufacturing teams running SOLIDWORKS alongside other professional applications, these results provide useful performance context when evaluating workstation requirements.

The Exception: APEXX W4 Leads in Ansys Mechanical

This is the section most benchmark pieces skip. We're not skipping it.

In Ansys® Mechanical 2026, the results were more mixed than in several of the other tested categories. On several direct solver tasks, the W4 was competitive with or led the T4 PRO at matched core counts.

The pattern here is meaningful: the APEXX W4 posted higher results across the direct solver tasks. Results on iterative and mixed varied by configuration.

For teams where Ansys simulation is the primary or a significant secondary workload, the APEXX W4 is particularly relevant. For teams where Ansys is one of several tools alongside Revit, AutoCAD, Creo, or media production applications, performance across the full application mix should also be considered.

The right decision depends on how much of the team's day is actually spent in Ansys vs. other applications. That is a conversation worth having with a performance specialist before purchasing.

Software Development and Scientific Computing: APEXX T4 PRO vs. APEXX W4

For teams doing large-scale software compilation or scientific computing workloads, the benchmark results showed measurable differences between the two platforms.

• Unreal Engine 5.7.4 compilation: The APEXX T4 PRO (9975WX) completed the build in 997 seconds vs. 1,172 seconds for the APEXX W4 (Xeon 676X), 15% faster.
• Chromium compilation: The APEXX T4 PRO completed in 3,741 seconds vs. 4,097 seconds, 9% faster.
• Cinebench 2026 1-thread: APEXX T4 PRO scored 515 vs. 418 for the W4, a 23% higher single-thread score that reflects the AMD platform's per-core performance.

Matching the APEXX T4 PRO or APEXX W4 to Your Team’s Workflow

APEXX T4 PRO Workloads Considerations

The T4 PRO is well-suited to teams focused on:

• 3D graphics and viewport performance across CAD, BIM, and design tools
• CPU-based rendering in V-Ray, Corona, Keyshot, or similar applications
• Video production and motion graphics in After Effects, Premiere Pro, or DaVinci Resolve
• AEC workflows in Revit and AutoCAD
• Large-scale compilation or scientific computing workloads
• Multidisciplinary environments where one platform needs to serve multiple applications

At matched core counts, the T4 PRO led the majority of benchmarks in this test suite. This Threadripper workstation is available in configurations from 16 to 96 cores, starting with the AMD Ryzen™ Threadripper™ PRO 9955WX.

Configure the APEXX T4 PRO

APEXX W4 Workload Considerations

The W4 is well-suited to teams where:

• Ansys Mechanical direct solver performance is a primary consideration
• Your team's workload is heavily weighted toward FEA and structural simulation
• Intel platform compatibility is required for specific software or enterprise environments

The W4 is available in configurations from 18 to 86 cores, starting with the Intel® Xeon® W 654.

Configure the APEXX W4

The Bigger Picture: Preparing APEXX Workstations for Emerging Workflows

One thing I tell every professional I work with: the workstation you're buying today isn't just for the workflow you have today.

AI-assisted tools are arriving inside the software your team already uses. Real-time visualization, automated analysis, generative design, and larger datasets are placing new demands on hardware with every release cycle.

As those capabilities layer onto existing workflows, the performance floor rises. Hardware that's adequate today may not be adequate in eighteen months.

BOXX has spent 25 years building workstations for exactly this kind of inflection point, for professionals who need their hardware to be the last thing they're worried about.

Need Help Choosing Between the APEXX T4 PRO and APEXX W4?

This is the conversation I have every day.

Most professionals aren't running just one application, and the right machine depends on how your team actually works, not just the spec sheet.

The data in this post covers a subset of the full benchmark results we've collected across these platforms. If you want to see the complete dataset or talk through which configuration makes sense for your specific workflow, reach out to our team.

Talk with a BOXX performance specialist.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between the BOXX APEXX T4 PRO and APEXX W4?

The primary difference is the processor platform. The APEXX T4 PRO uses AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9000 WX-Series processors, while the APEXX W4 uses Intel Xeon 600 Series processors. Benchmark testing also showed that each workstation performs differently depending on the application and workflow.

How do the APEXX T4 PRO and APEXX W4 specifications compare?

Both are mid-tower workstations that support up to four professional GPUs and 2TB of DDR5 ECC memory. The APEXX T4 PRO offers processor configurations from 16 to 96 cores, while the APEXX W4 offers configurations from 18 to 86 cores.

Which workstation performed better in APEXX T4 PRO vs. APEXX W4 benchmarks?

The APEXX T4 PRO led the majority of tested benchmarks at matched 24-core and 32-core configurations. It performed particularly well across AEC, rendering, media production, design, manufacturing, and compilation workloads, while the APEXX W4 led several Ansys Mechanical tests.

Which is better for 3D rendering, the APEXX T4 PRO or APEXX W4?

The APEXX T4 PRO was the stronger workstation for most tested 3D rendering workloads. It outperformed the APEXX W4 in V-Ray CPU, Corona Render, Cinebench multi-thread, and several related graphics and content-creation benchmarks.

Which APEXX workstation is best for video editing?

The APEXX T4 PRO is the stronger starting point for video editing, motion graphics, and media production based on the benchmark results. It posted higher scores in Adobe Premiere Pro and After Effects and led several DaVinci Resolve categories at matched core counts.

When should a team choose the APEXX W4?

The APEXX W4 should receive stronger consideration when Ansys Mechanical, FEA, or structural simulation is a primary workload. It may also be appropriate when specific software or enterprise environments require an Intel Xeon platform.

What processor and configuration options are available for the APEXX T4 PRO and APEXX W4?

As a Threadripper PRO workstation, the APEXX T4 PRO supports AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9000 WX-Series processors ranging from 16 to 96 cores. The APEXX W4 supports Intel Xeon 600 Series processors ranging from 18 to 86 cores. Both systems can be configured with professional GPUs, ECC memory, and enterprise-grade storage.

How do APEXX T4 PRO and APEXX W4 prices compare?

Pricing depends on the selected processor, GPU, memory, storage, and other configuration options. At comparable configurations, the two workstations are similarly priced, so the decision should focus primarily on which platform performs better for the applications your team uses.