Ryzen 7 2700 vs Core i7-6950X

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Core i7-6950X
2016
10 cores / 20 threads
11.26
+10.8%

Core i7-6950X outperforms Ryzen 7 2700 by a moderate 11% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i7-6950X and Ryzen 7 2700 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking626690
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.6521.06
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Core i7 (Desktop)AMD Ryzen 7
Architecture codenameBroadwell-E (2016)Zen+ (2018−2020)
Release date31 May 2016 (7 years ago)19 April 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,723$299
Current price$499 (0.3x MSRP)$176 (0.6x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 7 2700 has 477% better value for money than i7-6950X.

Detailed specifications

Core i7-6950X and Ryzen 7 2700 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 cores10 (Deca-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads2016
Base clock speed3 GHz3.2 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz4.1 GHz
Bus support9.6 GT/s / QPIno data
L1 cache32K (per core)96K (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache25 MB (shared)16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm12 nm
Die size246 mm2192 mm2
Maximum core temperature67°no data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °Cno data
Number of transistors3,800 million4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierYesYes

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-6950X and Ryzen 7 2700 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)140 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-6950X and Ryzen 7 2700. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataSSE4.2, SSE4A, AMD-V, AES, AVX2, FMA3, SHA
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Smart Response+no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0+no data
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Core i7-6950X and Ryzen 7 2700 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-6950X and Ryzen 7 2700 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 i7-6950X and Ryzen 7 2700. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory size128 GB64 GB
Max memory channels42
Maximum memory bandwidthno data46.933 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-6950X and Ryzen 7 2700.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes4020

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.

i7-6950X 11.26
+10.8%
Ryzen 7 2700 10.16

Core i7-6950X outperforms Ryzen 7 2700 by 11% 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%

i7-6950X 17419
+10.8%
Ryzen 7 2700 15717

Core i7-6950X outperforms Ryzen 7 2700 by 11% 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%

i7-6950X 1300
+16.8%
Ryzen 7 2700 1113

Core i7-6950X outperforms Ryzen 7 2700 by 17% 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%

i7-6950X 8474
+54.4%
Ryzen 7 2700 5489

Core i7-6950X outperforms Ryzen 7 2700 by 54% 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%

i7-6950X 6231
+38.3%
Ryzen 7 2700 4505

Core i7-6950X outperforms Ryzen 7 2700 by 38% 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%

i7-6950X 40378
+28.7%
Ryzen 7 2700 31385

Core i7-6950X outperforms Ryzen 7 2700 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%

i7-6950X 10658
+12.5%
Ryzen 7 2700 9475

Core i7-6950X outperforms Ryzen 7 2700 by 12% 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%

i7-6950X 3.5
+46.9%
Ryzen 7 2700 5.14

Ryzen 7 2700 outperforms Core i7-6950X by 47% 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%

i7-6950X 20
+19.7%
Ryzen 7 2700 17

Core i7-6950X outperforms Ryzen 7 2700 by 20% 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%

i7-6950X 1859
+19.9%
Ryzen 7 2700 1551

Core i7-6950X outperforms Ryzen 7 2700 by 20% 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%

i7-6950X 156
Ryzen 7 2700 161
+3.5%

Ryzen 7 2700 outperforms Core i7-6950X by 4% 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%

i7-6950X 1.9
+6.7%
Ryzen 7 2700 1.78

Core i7-6950X outperforms Ryzen 7 2700 by 7% 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%

i7-6950X 10.5
+16.7%
Ryzen 7 2700 9

Core i7-6950X outperforms Ryzen 7 2700 by 17% in TrueCrypt AES.

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%

i7-6950X 8450
+90.3%
Ryzen 7 2700 4440

Core i7-6950X outperforms Ryzen 7 2700 by 90% 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%

i7-6950X 196
+0.2%
Ryzen 7 2700 196

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%

i7-6950X 101
+12.6%
Ryzen 7 2700 90

Core i7-6950X outperforms Ryzen 7 2700 by 13% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.26 10.16
Recency 31 May 2016 19 April 2018
Physical cores 10 8
Threads 20 16
Cost $1723 $299
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 140 Watt 65 Watt

The Core i7-6950X is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 7 2700 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-6950X and Ryzen 7 2700, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

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


Intel Core i7-6950X
Core i7-6950X
AMD Ryzen 7 2700
Ryzen 7 2700

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.

Community ratings

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


3.8 217 votes

Rate Core i7-6950X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 2843 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 2700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i7-6950X or Ryzen 7 2700, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.