Ryzen 5 2600X vs Core i7-975
Aggregated performance score
Ryzen 5 2600X outperforms Core i7-975 by 299% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary Details
Comparing Core i7-975 and Ryzen 5 2600X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1710 | 770 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation | 0.74 | 18.53 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | Core i7 (Desktop) | AMD Ryzen 5 |
| Architecture codename | Bloomfield (2008−2010) | Zen+ (2018−2020) |
| Release date | June 2009 (14 years ago) | 19 April 2018 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $476 | $229 |
| Current price | $250 (0.5x MSRP) | $172 (0.8x MSRP) |
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ryzen 5 2600X has 2404% better value for money than i7-975.
Detailed Specifications
Core i7-975 and Ryzen 5 2600X 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 cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 3.33 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.6 GHz | 4.25 GHz |
| Bus support | 1333 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8 MB (shared) | 16 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 12 nm |
| Die size | 263 mm2 | 209.78 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 68 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 731 million | 4,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | Yes |
Compatibility
Information on Core i7-975 and Ryzen 5 2600X 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 configuration | 1 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FCLGA1366 | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-975 and Ryzen 5 2600X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2 | SSE4.2, SSE4A, AMD-V, AES, AVX2, FMA3, SHA |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 1.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| PAE | 36 Bit | no data |
| Status | Discontinued | no data |
Security technologies
Core i7-975 and Ryzen 5 2600X 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 i7-975 and Ryzen 5 2600X are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | no data | + |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-975 and Ryzen 5 2600X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4 Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory size | 24 GB | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | 3 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 46.933 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-975 and Ryzen 5 2600X.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 20 |
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.
Ryzen 5 2600X outperforms Core i7-975 by 299% 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%
Ryzen 5 2600X outperforms Core i7-975 by 300% 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%
Ryzen 5 2600X outperforms Core i7-975 by 129% 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%
Ryzen 5 2600X outperforms Core i7-975 by 178% 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%
Ryzen 5 2600X outperforms Core i7-975 by 21% 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%
Ryzen 5 2600X outperforms Core i7-975 by 80% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
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%
Core i7-975 outperforms Ryzen 5 2600X by 59% 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%
Ryzen 5 2600X outperforms Core i7-975 by 143% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.
Pros & Cons Summary
| Performance score | 2.22 | 8.86 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 6 |
| Threads | 8 | 12 |
| Cost | $476 | $229 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 95 Watt |
The Ryzen 5 2600X is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i7-975 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-975 and Ryzen 5 2600X, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
