Ryzen Threadripper 2920X vs Core i9-7900X

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Core i9-7900X
2017
10 cores / 20 threads
13.69
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X
2018
12 cores / 24 threads
16.52
+20.7%

Ryzen Threadripper 2920X outperforms Core i9-7900X by 21% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i9-7900X and Ryzen Threadripper 2920X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking487355
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.2644.81
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesCore i9 (Desktop)AMD Ryzen Threadripper
Architecture codenameSkylake-X (2018)ZEN+ (2018−2020)
Release date26 June 2017 (6 years ago)3 October 2018 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$999$649
Current price$540 (0.5x MSRP)$190 (0.3x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen Threadripper 2920X has 442% better value for money than i9-7900X.

Detailed specifications

Core i9-7900X and Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 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)12 (Dodeca-Core)
Threads2024
Base clock speed3.3 GHz3.5 GHz
Boost clock speed4.5 GHz4.3 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)96K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache14 MB (shared)32 MB
Chip lithography14 nm12 nm
Die sizeno data213 mm2
Maximum core temperature95 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data19,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplierYesYes

Compatibility

Information on Core i9-7900X and Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 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)
SocketSocket R4SP3r2
Power consumption (TDP)140 Watt180 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i9-7900X and Ryzen Threadripper 2920X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512no data
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX+no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0+no data
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Core i9-7900X and Ryzen Threadripper 2920X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i9-7900X and Ryzen Threadripper 2920X are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i9-7900X and Ryzen Threadripper 2920X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4 Quad-channel
Maximum memory size128 GB2 TiB
Max memory channels4no data
Maximum memory bandwidth85 GB/s93.867 GB/s
ECC memory support-no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/A-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i9-7900X and Ryzen Threadripper 2920X.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes44no data

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.

i9-7900X 13.69
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 16.52
+20.7%

Ryzen Threadripper 2920X outperforms Core i9-7900X by 21% 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%

i9-7900X 21175
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 25557
+20.7%

Ryzen Threadripper 2920X outperforms Core i9-7900X by 21% 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%

i9-7900X 1426
+12.9%
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 1263

Core i9-7900X outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 2920X by 13% 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%

i9-7900X 8835
+22.6%
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 7208

Core i9-7900X outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 2920X by 23% 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%

i9-7900X 7287
+34.8%
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 5407

Core i9-7900X outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 2920X by 35% 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%

i9-7900X 49738
+8.1%
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 46015

Core i9-7900X outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 2920X by 8% 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%

i9-7900X 12678
+15.8%
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 10948

Core i9-7900X outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 2920X by 16% 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%

i9-7900X 2.91
+4.1%
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 3.03

Ryzen Threadripper 2920X outperforms Core i9-7900X by 4% 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%

i9-7900X 24
+36.1%
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 18

Core i9-7900X outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 2920X by 36% 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%

i9-7900X 2148
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 2628
+22.3%

Ryzen Threadripper 2920X outperforms Core i9-7900X by 22% 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%

i9-7900X 193
+8.3%
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 178

Core i9-7900X outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 2920X by 8% 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%

i9-7900X 2.2
+12.2%
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 1.96

Core i9-7900X outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 2920X by 12% 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%

i9-7900X 12.1
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 16.2
+33.9%

Ryzen Threadripper 2920X outperforms Core i9-7900X by 34% 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%

i9-7900X 5918
+26.8%
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 4669

Core i9-7900X outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 2920X by 27% 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%

i9-7900X 217
+4.1%
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 209

Core i9-7900X outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 2920X by 4% 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%

i9-7900X 121
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X 131
+8.3%

Ryzen Threadripper 2920X outperforms Core i9-7900X by 8% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.69 16.52
Recency 26 June 2017 3 October 2018
Physical cores 10 12
Threads 20 24
Cost $999 $649
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 140 Watt 180 Watt

The Ryzen Threadripper 2920X is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i9-7900X in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i9-7900X and Ryzen Threadripper 2920X, 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 i9-7900X
Core i9-7900X
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X
Ryzen Threadripper 2920X

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.


4.1 192 votes

Rate Core i9-7900X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 62 votes

Rate Ryzen Threadripper 2920X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i9-7900X or Ryzen Threadripper 2920X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.