CPU Comparison

The benchmark data presents a remarkably close contest between the AMD FX-8800P and the Intel Core i7-920, with the Intel part securing a narrow but consistent victory across every single test. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical, the AMD FX-8800P posts 843 against the Intel Core i7-920’s 840, a difference of just 0.3 percent, placing both processors at the 22nd percentile of all CPUs. Despite being separated by seven years of architectural evolution, a mobile-focused 15-watt design, and a desktop flagship from the Nehalem era, the two chips deliver essentially equivalent computational output, with the Intel part’s multi-threading advantage proving just enough to edge out the AMD part’s higher boost clock in every measured workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i7-920 wins all five head-to-head benchmark comparisons, but the margins are exceptionally thin, ranging from 1.4 to 1.6 percent. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Intel part scores 246 against the AMD part’s 242, a delta of -1.6 percent in favor of Intel. The pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where Intel posts 1025 versus AMD’s 1010, a 1.5 percent lead. The single-core results tell the same story: Intel leads 144 to 142 in Cinebench R20 single-core (a 1.4 percent gap) and 344 to 339 in Cinebench R23 single-core (a 1.5 percent gap). The largest absolute margin appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where Intel scores 2442 against AMD’s 2407, yet this still translates to a mere 1.4 percent advantage.

These numbers reveal that the Intel Core i7-920’s advantage is consistent but not decisive. The 8-thread configuration of the Intel part, double the AMD’s 4 threads, helps it sustain a lead in multi-threaded workloads, but the AMD FX-8800P’s higher 3.40 GHz boost clock (versus Intel’s 2.93 GHz) keeps the AMD part within striking distance. Notably, the single-core results are nearly identical, suggesting that the AMD Excavator core is competitive on a per-thread basis with the older Nehalem architecture, even if it cannot overcome the Intel part’s thread-count advantage in aggregate. The Geekbench results, only available for the AMD part, show a multi-core score of 1234 and a single-core score of 524, but no direct comparison exists in the head-to-head data for this test.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-920 wins every benchmark where both parts were tested, making it the clear choice for pure computational throughput. Its 8 threads give it a structural advantage in heavily parallel workloads like Cinebench rendering, where even a small per-thread deficit is offset by having twice as many threads to feed. The data shows Intel leading by 1.4 to 1.6 percent in all multi-core tests, which is consistent with a thread-count advantage rather than superior per-core efficiency. For users running multi-threaded applications such as video encoding, 3D rendering, or scientific simulations, the Intel part’s 8 threads provide a more robust foundation, even if the real-world difference is likely imperceptible given the sub-2 percent margins.

The AMD FX-8800P, despite losing every comparison, has its own domain of strength based on its platform characteristics. Its 15-watt TDP, compared to Intel’s 130-watt TDP, means it can deliver nearly identical performance at a fraction of the power envelope. This makes the AMD part the only viable option for thin-and-light mobile systems, as its socket (AMD Socket FP4) and integrated Radeon R7 8CU graphics eliminate the need for a separate GPU. The Intel part has no integrated graphics and requires a discrete graphics card, making it unsuitable for compact, low-power builds. The AMD part’s 28 nm process node, versus Intel’s 45 nm, also contributes to its efficiency advantage, allowing a much smaller thermal footprint.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial, reflecting their different release eras and design goals. The AMD FX-8800P uses the Excavator architecture on a 28 nm process from GlobalFoundries, packing 3,100 million transistors into a 250 mm² die. It features 4 cores with 4 threads, a base clock of 2.10 GHz, and a boost clock of 3.40 GHz. Its cache hierarchy includes 320 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per module, with no L3 cache. The Intel Core i7-920, by contrast, uses the Nehalem architecture on Intel’s 45 nm process, with 731 million transistors on a 263 mm² die. It has 4 cores and 8 threads (via Hyper-Threading), a base clock of 2.67 GHz, and a boost clock of 2.93 GHz. Its cache layout is different: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 8 MB L3 cache.

The memory subsystems also diverge significantly. The AMD part uses dual-channel DDR3 with a measured bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, while the Intel part uses triple-channel DDR3, which historically provides higher bandwidth, though no specific figure is listed in the data. Both support DDR3 memory and lack ECC support. The AMD part uses PCIe Gen 3 with 8 CPU lanes, while the Intel part is limited to PCIe Gen 2. The AMD part integrates a Radeon R7 8CU GPU, while the Intel part has none. These differences explain the performance parity: the Intel part’s larger L3 cache and extra threads compensate for its older process and lower clock speeds, while the AMD part’s higher clocks and newer process close the gap but cannot overcome the Intel part’s structural advantages.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FX-8800P has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 843, compared to the Intel Core i7-920’s 840, a difference of 0.3 percent.

Q: How many threads does each processor support?

A: The AMD FX-8800P supports 4 threads across its 4 cores, while the Intel Core i7-920 supports 8 threads across its 4 cores.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD FX-8800P has a TDP of 15 watts, while the Intel Core i7-920 has a TDP of 130 watts.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: No. The AMD FX-8800P includes Radeon R7 8CU integrated graphics, while the Intel Core i7-920 has no integrated graphics.

Q: Which processor was released earlier?

A: The Intel Core i7-920 was released on November 17, 2008, while the AMD FX-8800P was released on June 2, 2015.

Q: In the head-to-head benchmarks, what is the largest performance gap?

A: The largest gap is 1.6 percent, in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the Intel Core i7-920 scores 246 versus the AMD FX-8800P’s 242.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear, if narrow, verdict: the Intel Core i7-920 is the faster processor in every benchmark where both were tested, winning all five comparisons with margins between 1.4 and 1.6 percent. Its 8 threads provide a measurable advantage in multi-threaded workloads, and its single-core performance is also marginally better, likely due to its higher base clock of 2.67 GHz versus the AMD part’s 2.10 GHz. For users prioritizing raw computational performance in multi-threaded applications, the Intel part is the safer choice, though the performance delta is so small that it would be difficult to notice in real-world use.

However, the AMD FX-8800P is the only rational choice for mobile or power-constrained systems. Its 15-watt TDP is a fraction of the Intel part’s 130-watt TDP, and it includes integrated graphics, a feature the Intel part lacks entirely. The AMD part’s 28 nm process and 3.40 GHz boost clock allow it to match the Intel part’s performance while consuming less than 12 percent of the power. For a laptop or a compact desktop requiring minimal cooling, the AMD FX-8800P is the only viable option. The Intel Core i7-920, despite its slight performance edge, is a desktop-only part that demands a discrete GPU and substantial cooling. The verdict depends entirely on the use case: performance-per-watt favors AMD; raw performance, however marginal, favors Intel.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FX-8800P | Intel Core i7-920 |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 4 | 4 |

| Threads | 4 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 2.10 GHz | 2.67 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.40 GHz | 2.93 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 130 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP4 | Intel Socket 1366 |

| Architecture | Excavator | Nehalem |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 45 nm |

| Transistors | 3,100 million | 731 million |

| Die Size | 250 mm² | 263 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 320 KB | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per module) | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | None | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Triple-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 34.1 GB/s | Not specified |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 8 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 2 |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon R7 8CU | None |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | June 2015 | November 2008 |