AMD Athlon Silver 10 vs Intel Core i9-9980XE Comparison

The Intel Core i9-9980XE and the AMD Athlon Silver 10 are among the strangest pairings in the database: an 18-core desktop extreme processor from Intel's 9th Gen X-Series sitting alongside a 2-core mobile chip from AMD's Zen 2-based Mendocino family. Both land at the 63rd percentile versus all CPUs in the database, and their average benchmark scores of 7398 and 6849 sit within roughly 8 percent of each other, but that superficial similarity hides two utterly different machines built for utterly different jobs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

A direct head-to-head is complicated by the data itself: the two chips were run through different benchmark suites, so there are no recorded shared tests and no recorded wins in either direction. The database shows winsA and winsB both at zero for this matchup. What can be compared honestly is each processor against its own peer group.

The i9-9980XE's rendering credentials are substantial. It scores 2699 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, 11247 in R20 multi-core, and 26780 in R23 multi-core, with single-core results of 380, 1587, and 3780 respectively. Geekbench results are 1437 single-core and 11270 multi-core. The multi-core to single-core ratio in Geekbench is nearly 8:1, which reflects the 18-core, 36-thread configuration doing exactly what it was designed to do: parallel throughput. The average score of 7398 places it in a cluster with the AMD EPYC 7282 (7409, a delta of -0.1 percent), the Intel Core i9-9990XE (7415, -0.2 percent), the Intel Core i5-4570 (7421, -0.3 percent), and the Intel Core i5-7400 (7469, -1 percent). In other words, on an aggregate basis the 9980XE is statistically inseparable from those parts, fractionally behind all four of them by a margin that is well within measurement noise for a database of this kind.

The Athlon Silver 10 was measured on the PassMark suite rather than Cinebench or Geekbench. Its results are: 42492 in data compression, 2125 in data encryption, 2747 in extended instructions, 13 in find prime numbers, 5936 in floating point math, 9354 in integer math, 3543 in the multithread test, 210 in physics, 4736 in random string sorting, and 2089 in single-thread. The single-thread score of 2089 against a multithread score of 3543 is the signature of a 2-core, 2-thread part: nearly 60 percent of its throughput is available to a single thread, a profile opposite to the i9's. Its average of 6849 puts it effectively level with the AMD Athlon X4 970 (6850, delta 0 percent) and the Intel Core i3-1115G4 (6851, delta 0 percent), slightly ahead of the Intel Xeon Gold 6154 (6803, +0.7 percent) and slightly behind the Intel Xeon W-2195 (6892, -0.6 percent).

The aggregate gap between the two subjects is 549 points in the i9's favor, about 8 percent. Given the 63rd percentile placement both share, the takeaway is that the averages mask the real story: the 9980XE concentrates its strength in sustained parallel rendering workloads, while the Athlon Silver 10 spreads modest capability across a mobile efficiency envelope.

Architecture Differences

These chips diverge on every architectural axis. The i9-9980XE is a Skylake-X design on Intel's 14 nm process, fabricated by Intel, with a die size of 484 mm². The Athlon Silver 10 is a Zen 2 design codenamed Mendocino, built on TSMC's 6 nm node with a die size of just 100 mm². The 9980XE is end-of-life; the Athlon Silver 10 is an active mobile product, which reflects their respective market segments of Desktop and Mobile.

Core counts differ by a factor of nine: 18 cores and 36 threads for the 9980XE versus 2 cores and 2 threads for the Athlon. Clocks tell the complementary story. The Intel part base-clocks at 3.00 GHz and boosts to 4.50 GHz; the AMD part base-clocks at 2.40 GHz and boosts to 3.50 GHz. Neither chip uses simultaneous multithreading to bridge that gap: only the i9 does, via its 36 threads. The 9980XE is multiplier unlocked, the Athlon is not, so tuning headroom exists only on the Intel side.

Cache hierarchies are similarly lopsided. The 9980XE carries 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 24.75 MB of shared L3. The Athlon Silver 10 matches the 64 KB L1 per core but has 512 KB of L2 per core and only 2 MB of shared L3. With 18 cores, the i9's aggregate L2 alone dwarfs the Athlon's entire cache budget.

Memory and platform I/O diverge sharply. The 9980XE uses DDR4 on a quad-channel bus with 85.3 GB/s of bandwidth, and exposes PCIe Gen 3 with 44 lanes from the CPU. The Athlon Silver 10 uses LPDDR5 on a dual-channel bus with a recorded 88.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and PCIe Gen 3 with just 4 CPU lanes. Interestingly, the newer LPDDR5 implementation edges out the older quad-channel DDR4 setup in raw bandwidth despite the Athlon's much smaller platform footprint. The Intel part has no integrated graphics; the AMD part includes Radeon 610M graphics, a decisive difference for its mobile role. Neither supports ECC memory.

Thermal design profiles separate the two by an order of magnitude: 165 W for the 9980XE versus 15 W for the Athlon Silver 10. Sockets are likewise incompatible categories, Intel Socket 2066 versus AMD Socket FT6. The 9980XE's launch MSRP was $1979; no launch MSRP is recorded for the Athlon Silver 10.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to two non-overlapping use cases. Anyone whose workload is rendering, encoding, or otherwise embarrassingly parallel should look at the i9-9980XE: Cinebench R23 multi-core at 26780 and Geekbench multi-core at 11270 are the strongest numbers in this comparison by a wide margin relative to anything in the Athlon's dataset. The unlocked multiplier and 44 PCIe Gen 3 lanes make it a platform for throughput above all else, at the cost of a 165 W TDP, end-of-life status, and no integrated graphics.

Anyone whose priority is a low-power mobile part with display capability should look at the Athlon Silver 10. Its 15 W TDP, Radeon 610M graphics, active production status, and 88.0 GB/s of LPDDR5 bandwidth describe a modern efficient laptop chip, not a workstation contender. Its single-thread strength of 2089 in PassMark means the two cores it has are not standing still. Nothing in the data suggests either chip substitutes for the other.

FAQ

Q: Do the two chips share any recorded benchmark results?

A: No. The i9-9980XE was tested with Cinebench R15, R20, R23, and Geekbench, while the Athlon Silver 10 was tested with the PassMark suite. There are no overlapping tests and no recorded head-to-head wins for either processor.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The i9-9980XE averages 7398 and the Athlon Silver 10 averages 6849, a gap of 549 points in Intel's favor, roughly 8 percent. Both sit at the 63rd percentile versus all CPUs in the database.

Q: Which chip has the higher clock speeds?

A: The i9-9980XE on both counts: 3.00 GHz base and 4.50 GHz boost, versus 2.40 GHz base and 3.50 GHz boost for the Athlon Silver 10.

Q: Does either processor have integrated graphics?

A: The Athlon Silver 10 includes Radeon 610M graphics. The i9-9980XE has no integrated graphics recorded.

Q: Which rivals are statistically closest to each chip?

A: The i9-9980XE's nearest rivals are the AMD EPYC 7282 (-0.1 percent), Intel Core i9-9990XE (-0.2 percent), Intel Core i5-4570 (-0.3 percent), and Intel Core i5-7400 (-1 percent). The Athlon Silver 10's are the AMD Athlon X4 970 (0 percent), Intel Core i3-1115G4 (0 percent), Intel Xeon W-2195 (-0.6 percent), and Intel Xeon Gold 6154 (+0.7 percent).

Q: Are both chips still in production?

A: No. The i9-9980XE is end-of-life, while the Athlon Silver 10 is active.

Where Each One Wins

The i9-9980XE wins on parallel throughput. Its 18 cores and 36 threads translate into a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 26780, an R20 score of 11247, and Geekbench multi-core of 11270. Its quad-channel DDR4 with 85.3 GB/s of bandwidth and 44 PCIe Gen 3 lanes support add-in hardware, and the unlocked multiplier permits tuning. Workloads that scale across threads, such as rendering and batch processing, are squarely its territory.

The Athlon Silver 10 wins on efficiency and integration. A 15 W TDP against 165 W, a 100 mm² die on TSMC's 6 nm node, integrated Radeon 610M graphics, and modern LPDDR5 memory with 88.0 GB/s of bandwidth make it a complete low-power mobile solution. Its PassMark single-thread score of 2089 shows per-thread responsiveness that serves everyday tasks, and its strong data compression result of 42492 along with integer math at 9354 indicate capable general-purpose performance for its class. It cannot compete with the i9's rendering output, and the data shows it was never meant to.

The percentile tie is the most misleading number on the page. Equal rankings, unequal machines: the choice between them reduces to whether the workload needs eighteen cores or fifteen watts.