Ryzen 5 2400G vs Core i7-3960X

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Core i7-3960X
2011
6 cores / 12 threads
5.43
Ryzen 5 2400G
2018
4 cores / 8 threads
5.65
+4.1%

Ryzen 5 2400G outperforms Core i7-3960X by 4% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

General info

Comparing Core i7-3960X and Ryzen 5 2400G processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking10641040
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money2.407.08
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesCore i7 (Desktop)AMD Ryzen 5
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge-E (2011−2013)Raven Ridge (2017−2018)
Release date14 November 2011 (12 years ago)12 February 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$861$169
Current price$170 (0.2x MSRP)$236 (1.4x MSRP)

Value for money

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 5 2400G has 195% better value for money than i7-3960X.

Technical specs

Core i7-3960X and Ryzen 5 2400G basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores6 (Hexa-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads128
Base clock speed3.3 GHz3.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz3.9 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)128K (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache15 MB (shared)4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm14 nm
Die size435 mm2210 mm2
Maximum core temperature67 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)67 °Cno data
Number of transistors2,270 million4,950 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierYesYes

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-3960X and Ryzen 5 2400G compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCLGA2011AM4
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-3960X and Ryzen 5 2400G. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVXXFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT
AES-NI++
FMAno data+
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+no data
Smart Response+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Core i7-3960X and Ryzen 5 2400G technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Identity Protection+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-3960X and Ryzen 5 2400G are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno data+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-3960X and Ryzen 5 2400G. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory size64 GB64 GB
Max memory channels42
Maximum memory bandwidth51.2 GB/s46.933 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon RX Vega 11

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-3960X and Ryzen 5 2400G.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanes4012

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

i7-3960X 5.43
Ryzen 5 2400G 5.65
+4.1%

Ryzen 5 2400G outperforms Core i7-3960X by 4% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

i7-3960X 8401
Ryzen 5 2400G 8730
+3.9%

Ryzen 5 2400G outperforms Core i7-3960X by 4% in Passmark.

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

i7-3960X 688
Ryzen 5 2400G 1057
+53.6%

Ryzen 5 2400G outperforms Core i7-3960X by 54% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

i7-3960X 3350
+1.9%
Ryzen 5 2400G 3289

Core i7-3960X outperforms Ryzen 5 2400G by 2% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

i7-3960X 5014
+4.3%
Ryzen 5 2400G 4805

Core i7-3960X outperforms Ryzen 5 2400G by 4% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

i7-3960X 27190
+29.3%
Ryzen 5 2400G 21024

Core i7-3960X outperforms Ryzen 5 2400G by 29% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

i7-3960X 8330
+24.9%
Ryzen 5 2400G 6672

Core i7-3960X outperforms Ryzen 5 2400G by 25% in 3DMark06 CPU.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

i7-3960X 5.12
+34.8%
Ryzen 5 2400G 6.9

Ryzen 5 2400G outperforms Core i7-3960X by 35% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

i7-3960X 11
+11.2%
Ryzen 5 2400G 9

Core i7-3960X outperforms Ryzen 5 2400G by 11% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

i7-3960X 1158
+36.8%
Ryzen 5 2400G 847

Core i7-3960X outperforms Ryzen 5 2400G by 37% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

i7-3960X 159
+2.2%
Ryzen 5 2400G 156

Core i7-3960X outperforms Ryzen 5 2400G by 2% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

i7-3960X 1.52
Ryzen 5 2400G 1.77
+16.4%

Ryzen 5 2400G outperforms Core i7-3960X by 16% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i7-3960X 5.2
Ryzen 5 2400G 5.2

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i7-3960X 4205
+9.3%
Ryzen 5 2400G 3846

Core i7-3960X outperforms Ryzen 5 2400G by 9% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i7-3960X 173
+0.8%
Ryzen 5 2400G 172

Core i7-3960X outperforms Ryzen 5 2400G by 1% in x264 encoding pass 1.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

i7-3960X 55
+14.3%
Ryzen 5 2400G 48

Core i7-3960X outperforms Ryzen 5 2400G by 14% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Gaming performance

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 5.43 5.65
Recency 14 November 2011 12 February 2018
Physical cores 6 4
Threads 12 8
Cost $861 $169
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 65 Watt

We couldn't decide between Core i7-3960X and Ryzen 5 2400G. The differences in performance seem too small.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-3960X and Ryzen 5 2400G, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Core i7-3960X
Core i7-3960X
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G
Ryzen 5 2400G

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

User Ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4 58 votes

Rate Core i7-3960X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 1304 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 2400G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i7-3960X or Ryzen 5 2400G, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.