AMD FX-9830P vs Intel Core i7-2920XM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the AMD FX-9830P and the Intel Core i7-2920XM reveals a clear split in workload characteristics. Across seven head-to-head measurements, the Intel part claims five victories while the AMD processor takes two, but the margin distribution tells a more nuanced story than the raw win count suggests.

In the Cinebench suite, the Intel Core i7-2920XM establishes a consistent advantage across every iteration. The multicore results show the Intel part scoring 353 versus 282 in Cinebench R15, a delta of -20.1% from the AMD processor's perspective. That pattern repeats almost identically in newer versions: Cinebench R20 multicore sees the Intel chip at 1471 against 1178 for the AMD FX-9830P (-19.9%), and Cinebench R23 multicore follows with 3504 versus 2806 (-19.9%). The consistency across these three generations of the Cinebench test suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-specific.

Single-core Cinebench results show the same magnitude of difference. The Intel Core i7-2920XM posts 207 in Cinebench R20 single-core versus 166 for the AMD FX-9830P, a -19.8% delta. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the scores are 494 and 396 respectively, again -19.8%. These single-threaded margins mirror the multicore results almost exactly, indicating that the Intel architecture's per-core efficiency advantage is the dominant factor in this benchmark family.

The Geekbench results reverse the picture entirely. The AMD FX-9830P wins the Geekbench multicore test with 1606 points against 1452 for the Intel part, a 10.6% advantage. More dramatically, the Geekbench single-core test shows the AMD processor at 605 versus 430, a 40.7% lead. This is not a small edge; it is a substantial margin that suggests the AMD chip's execution engine handles Geekbench's specific instruction mix far more effectively than the older Intel design.

The average benchmark scores place these processors in nearly the same tier. The AMD FX-9830P averages 1006 points across its benchmark set, while the Intel Core i7-2920XM averages 995 points. Both sit at the 27th percentile of all CPUs in the database, meaning they occupy the same overall performance bracket despite their divergent strengths. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-880 and Intel Core i5-10210Y at identical average scores, plus the Intel Core i7-2630QM at 0.1% higher and the Intel Processor N100 at 0.1% lower. The Intel Core i7-2920XM, for its part, matches the Intel Core i7-2635QM and AMD Opteron 4226 exactly, with the Intel Core i3-8130U 0.1% higher and the Intel Xeon W3565 0.2% higher.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FX-9830P averages 1006 points, while the Intel Core i7-2920XM averages 995 points. This 11-point difference places both at the 27th percentile of all CPUs, so they occupy essentially the same overall performance tier.

Q: How large is the AMD processor's Geekbench single-core advantage?

A: The AMD FX-9830P scores 605 in Geekbench single-core against 430 for the Intel Core i7-2920XM, a 40.7% lead. This is the largest head-to-head margin recorded between the two processors in any benchmark.

Q: Does the Intel part win any benchmark by a similar margin?

A: No. The Intel Core i7-2920XM's largest winning margin is -20.1% in Cinebench R15 multicore. All five of its victories fall between -19.8% and -20.1%, a remarkably tight band that contrasts sharply with the AMD processor's 40.7% single-core Geekbench win.

Q: How do the processors compare in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The Intel Core i7-2920XM scores 3504 against 2806 for the AMD FX-9830P, a -19.9% delta. This result is consistent with the other Cinebench multicore tests, which all show the Intel part ahead by roughly one-fifth.

Q: What do the nearest rival comparisons show for each processor?

A: The AMD FX-9830P's closest rival is the Intel Core i7-880 at an identical 1006 average score. The Intel Core i7-2920XM's closest rival is the Intel Core i7-2635QM at 995. Both processors are surrounded by similarly performing chips from earlier generations.

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmarks overall?

A: The Intel Core i7-2920XM wins five of the seven recorded head-to-head tests. The AMD FX-9830P wins two, both from the Geekbench suite.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FX-9830P establishes its territory in Geekbench workloads. The multicore result of 1606 demonstrates a 10.6% advantage over the Intel part, while the single-core score of 605 delivers a 40.7% lead. For applications that stress the processor in ways similar to Geekbench, particularly those that reward high-frequency integer operations and responsive single-threaded execution, the AMD processor holds a decisive edge. The data indicates this is not a marginal preference but a fundamental architectural strength.

The Intel Core i7-2920XM dominates every Cinebench test in the database. Its scores of 353 in R15, 1471 in R20, and 3504 in R23 for multicore workloads all land within a narrow -19.8% to -20.1% range relative to the AMD processor. Single-core Cinebench results follow the same pattern. This consistency across three major Cinebench versions suggests that rendering workloads, 3D modeling tasks, and other applications built on similar compute patterns will reliably favor the Intel chip.

The use-case split is therefore straightforward. Content creation and rendering pipelines that rely on Cinebench-like workloads will see the Intel Core i7-2920XM deliver roughly 20% higher throughput. General-purpose computing, system responsiveness, and applications that resemble Geekbench's mixed integer and memory-access patterns will favor the AMD FX-9830P, sometimes by very large margins. The 27th percentile ranking for both chips indicates that neither is a high-end part by modern standards, but within their shared performance class, the choice comes down to workload type rather than overall capability.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge on nearly every specification field. The AMD FX-9830P uses 4 cores and 4 threads, while the Intel Core i7-2920XM provides 4 cores and 8 threads through Hyper-Threading. Clock speeds favor the AMD part: 3.00 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost, compared to 2.50 GHz base and 3.50 GHz boost for the Intel chip. Despite the AMD processor's higher clocks, thermal design power tells the opposite story: the AMD FX-9830P draws 35 watts while the Intel Core i7-2920XM is rated at 55 watts.

Memory architecture differs completely. The AMD FX-9830P supports DDR4 memory with dual-channel configuration and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core i7-2920XM uses DDR3, also dual-channel, but with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth. Neither supports ECC memory. PCIe connectivity also diverges: the AMD part provides Gen 3 with 8 lanes, while the Intel chip offers Gen 2 with 16 lanes.

Integrated graphics are present in both, but with different capabilities. The AMD FX-9830P includes Radeon R7 8CU graphics, while the Intel Core i7-2920XM ships with Intel HD 3000. The AMD processor's multiplier is locked; the Intel part's multiplier is unlocked, reflecting its Extreme edition positioning. The Intel Core i7-2920XM has a recorded launch MSRP of $1096. The AMD FX-9830P has no launch MSRP recorded in the database. Both processors are end-of-life products in the mobile segment.

Architecture Differences

The AMD FX-9830P is built on the Excavator architecture from the Bristol Ridge family, fabricated on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It uses 3,100 million transistors across a 250 mm² die. Cache organization consists of 320 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per module, with no L3 cache. The Bristol Ridge codename reflects AMD's modular design approach, where pairs of cores share resources within a module.

The Intel Core i7-2920XM belongs to the Sandy Bridge architecture, the Core i7 Extreme generation, manufactured on Intel's 32 nm process with 1,160 million transistors in a 216 mm² die. Its cache hierarchy differs substantially: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 8 MB L3 cache. The Sandy Bridge design integrates the memory controller and graphics on the same die and uses a ring bus to connect cores and cache.

The transistor count difference is notable: the AMD FX-9830P packs nearly three times as many transistors (3,100 million versus 1,160 million) despite its smaller 28 nm versus 32 nm process advantage. The AMD chip's larger die area (250 mm² versus 216 mm²) reflects this transistor density. The architectural philosophies are clear: AMD relies on higher clock speeds and a wide Excavator core design, while Intel's Sandy Bridge uses a smaller, more power-hungry design with Hyper-Threading and a shared L3 cache to extract performance from lower clock speeds.

The release dates place these chips five years apart, with the Intel Core i7-2920XM launching in early 2011 and the AMD FX-9830P arriving in mid-2016. The process node advantage belongs to the AMD part, yet the benchmark data shows the older Intel architecture still leads in Cinebench throughput. The AMD processor's higher memory bandwidth (38.4 GB/s versus 25.6 GB/s) and newer PCIe generation do not translate into Cinebench wins, suggesting that core efficiency and cache architecture matter more for that workload than raw memory throughput.