Phenom II X4 920 vs Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X outperforms Phenom II X4 920 by a whopping 2365% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 176 | 2542 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 15.57 | 4.49 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Ryzen Threadripper | no data |
| Power efficiency | 4.72 | 0.43 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | no data |
| Architecture codename | Matisse (2019−2020) | Deneb (2009−2011) |
| Release date | 25 November 2019 (6 years ago) | 8 January 2009 (17 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $1,399 | $90 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X has 247% better value for money than Phenom II X4 920.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X and Phenom II X4 920 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 | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 48 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.5 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Bus rate | 8 × 16 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 38 | no data |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 128 MB | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm, 12 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | no data | 258 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 19,200 million | 758 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen Threadripper 3960X and Phenom II X4 920 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 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | TR4 | AM3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 280 Watt | 125 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper 3960X and Phenom II X4 920. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper 3960X and Phenom II X4 920 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper 3960X and Phenom II X4 920. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Eight-channel | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 256 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 4 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 102.403 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | - | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen Threadripper 3960X and Phenom II X4 920.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 31.31 | 1.27 |
| Recency | 25 November 2019 | 8 January 2009 |
| Physical cores | 24 | 4 |
| Threads | 48 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 280 Watt | 125 Watt |
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X has a 2365.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, 500% more physical cores and 1100% more threads, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.
Phenom II X4 920, on the other hand, has 124% lower power consumption.
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3960X is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Phenom II X4 920 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
