AMD Ryzen 5 1600 vs Intel Core i7-9700 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear picture: the Intel Core i7-9700 wins 14 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, while the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 takes 3. The margin of victory, however, varies dramatically depending on the workload.

The biggest single win for Intel comes in Cinebench R23 multicore, where the i7-9700 scores 11200 against the Ryzen 5 1600's 6468, a 73.2% advantage. That is a massive gap for a multicore test, and it reflects the i7-9700's higher boost clock and newer architecture. Similarly, in Cinebench R23 singlecore, Intel leads 1581 to 915, a 72.8% delta. These two results alone establish the i7-9700 as the stronger processor for heavily threaded modern workloads and for lightly threaded tasks that depend on raw single-core speed.

Geekbench results reinforce the pattern. The i7-9700 posts 6800 in multicore versus 5558 for the Ryzen part, a 22.3% lead. In singlecore, the gap widens to 43.8%, with Intel at 1560 and AMD at 1085. The singlecore margin is especially telling for everyday responsiveness, application launches, and older software that cannot use many threads.

PassMark tests show a split personality. Intel dominates in extended instructions, scoring 14488 against 6667, a 117.3% lead. That is the largest percentage difference in the entire dataset. Intel also wins floating point math by 59.7% (34187 to 21402), find prime numbers by 37.1% (48 to 35), physics by 27.5% (820 to 643), and random string sorting by 16% (23482 to 20240). The multithread score goes Intel's way too: 13223 to 12270, a 7.8% margin. Data compression favors Intel by a narrower 5.4% (181411 to 172053).

The AMD Ryzen 5 1600's wins are concentrated in specific areas. The largest is data encryption, where it scores 11683 against Intel's 4322, a 63% advantage. That is a decisive victory and suggests the Ryzen part has a meaningful edge in encryption-heavy workloads. AMD also wins integer math, 41470 to 40138, though only by 3.2%. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the two are effectively tied: AMD scores 1129, Intel 1128, a delta of just 0.1%. That near-dead heat in an older render test shows how closely matched these CPUs can be in certain legacy workloads.

The singlecore results in Cinebench R15 tell a different story: Intel wins 159 to 147, an 8.2% lead. That is a smaller singlecore margin than in newer tests, which suggests the i7-9700's advantage has grown with newer software that better exploits its architecture.

The passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread entries are duplicates, both showing Intel at 2756 and AMD at 2066, a 33.4% lead for Intel. No matter how you slice the single-thread data, the i7-9700 comes out ahead.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-9700 is the clear choice for single-threaded performance. Every singlecore benchmark in the dataset favors it: Cinebench R15, Cinebench R23, Geekbench, and PassMark single-thread tests. The margins range from 8.2% in Cinebench R15 to 72.8% in Cinebench R23. For users running older applications, productivity software, or games that rely on one or two fast cores, the i7-9700 provides noticeably better responsiveness.

The i7-9700 also wins in most multicore scenarios, but the size of the win depends on the workload. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the 73.2% lead is enormous. In PassMark multithread, the lead shrinks to 7.8%. In data compression, it is only 5.4%. And in Cinebench R15 multicore, the two are effectively tied. So while the i7-9700 is generally faster for parallel workloads, the margin is not uniform across all applications.

The Ryzen 5 1600 has a specialized role. Its 63% lead in data encryption is the standout result, making it the better pick for encryption-heavy tasks such as disk encryption, secure communications, or cryptographic workloads. Its 3.2% win in integer math is modest but real. For users who know their primary workload involves encryption or heavy integer arithmetic, the Ryzen part has a measurable advantage.

The Ryzen 5 1600 also offers 12 threads versus the i7-9700's 8, which helps in certain parallel tasks even though the benchmark data shows Intel winning most multicore tests. The Cinebench R15 multicore tie is evidence that in some older render workloads, the extra threads compensate for the lower clock speeds. Users running legacy rendering software might see similar performance from both CPUs.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i7-9700 wins every singlecore benchmark in the dataset. The lead ranges from 8.2% in Cinebench R15 to 72.8% in Cinebench R23, with Geekbench showing 43.8% and PassMark showing 33.4%.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes. It wins in PassMark data encryption by 63%, in PassMark integer math by 3.2%, and in Cinebench R15 multicore by 0.1%. The encryption win is especially large.

Q: How do the two compare in multicore rendering?

A: In Cinebench R23 multicore, the i7-9700 scores 11200 versus 6468, a 73.2% lead. In the older Cinebench R15 multicore, they are effectively tied at 1128 and 1129.

Q: Which CPU has more threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 1600 has 12 threads from 6 cores, while the Intel Core i7-9700 has 8 threads from 8 cores. The Ryzen part has 4 more threads, but the Intel part still wins most multicore benchmarks.

Q: What is the difference in boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i7-9700 boosts to 4.70 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 boosts to 3.60 GHz. The Intel part also has a higher base clock at 3.00 GHz versus 3.20 GHz for AMD.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 1600 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i7-9700 does not.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in core count: the Intel Core i7-9700 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 has 6 cores and 12 threads. Clock speeds also differ significantly. The i7-9700 has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The Ryzen 5 1600 has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 3.60 GHz. Both have a 65 W TDP.

The sockets are incompatible. The Intel part uses Intel Socket 1151, while the AMD part uses AMD Socket AM4. The i7-9700 includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the Ryzen 5 1600 has no integrated graphics. The Intel part has a locked multiplier, while the Ryzen part has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking.

Memory support is similar: both use DDR4, both are dual-channel, and both have 42.7 GB/s memory bandwidth. The Ryzen 5 1600 supports ECC memory; the Intel part does not. Both use PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

The Intel Core i7-9700 was released on 2019-04-04 and is marked end-of-life. The AMD Ryzen 5 1600 was released on 2019-04-22, and its production status is active. The launch MSRP for the i7-9700 is $333. The launch MSRP for the Ryzen 5 1600 is $219.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i7-9700 is built on Intel's Coffee Lake architecture, specifically the Coffee Lake Refresh generation. It uses a 14 nm process from Intel's foundry. The die size is 180.3 mm². The cache layout is 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3.

The AMD Ryzen 5 1600 uses AMD's Zen architecture, codenamed Zen (Summit Ridge. It is built on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The die size, with 4,800 million transistors. The cache layout is 96 KB L1 per core, 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3.

The Intel part has 8 cores and 8 threads with a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The AMD part has 6 cores and 12 threads with a boost clock of 3.60 GHz. Both processors have a 65 W TDP.

The i7-9700 uses a locked multiplier, 16 GB shared L3, supports DDR4 memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, supports DDR4 memory bus dual-channel, supports DDR4 memory support. The Ryzen 5 1600 has a 16 MB shared L3 cache size of 16 MB shared L3 cache, 512 MB L2 per core, 96 KB L1 cache per core, and 96 KB L1 per core.

The Intel i7-9700 has no ECC memory support. The AMD Ryzen 5 1600 supports ECC memory. The i7-9700 has integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630, while the Ryzen 5 1600 has no integrated graphics. The i7-9700 uses Intel Socket 1151, while the Ryzen 5 1600 uses AMD Socket AM4. The i7-9700 has a 12 MB shared L3 cache, the Ryzen 5 1600 has a 16 MB shared L3 cache. The i7-9700 has a die size of 180.3 mm², the Ryzen 5 1600 has a die size of 213 mm².

The Verdict

The benchmark data supports a straightforward recommendation: the Intel Core i7-9700 is the stronger processor for the majority of workloads. It wins 14 of 17 head-to-head comparisons, including every singlecore test and most multicore tests. The margins in Cinebench R23 are enormous, with Intel leading by 73.2% in multicore and 72.8% in singlecore. Geekbench shows a 22.3% multicore lead and a 43.8% singlecore lead. For users who prioritize raw performance in modern applications, rendering, and general productivity, the i7-9700 is the better choice.

The AMD Ryzen 5 1600 is the better pick for a narrower set of tasks. Its 63% lead in data encryption is the largest single win in the entire comparison. Anyone running encryption-heavy workloads should give it serious consideration. The 3.2% lead in integer math is smaller but still favors AMD. The Ryzen part also has 12 threads versus 8, which may help in specific parallel workloads that are not well represented in these benchmarks. Its unlocked multiplier is another advantage for users who plan to overclock.

The near-tie in Cinebench R15 multicore is worth noting. In that older render test, the Ryzen 5 1600 edges out the i7-9700 by 0.1%. Users running legacy software that resembles that workload may see comparable performance from both CPUs. However, in the newer Cinebench R23 multicore, the i7-9700 is dramatically faster, suggesting that Intel's advantage grows as software becomes more modern.

For most builders, the Intel Core i7-9700 is the safer recommendation. It wins more tests, wins by larger margins, and offers integrated graphics, which simplifies system building. The AMD Ryzen 5 1600 makes sense for specific use cases: encryption-heavy workloads, integer arithmetic, overclocking enthusiasts, or users who want ECC memory support. The data does not support a general recommendation for the Ryzen part, but it is clearly the right tool for certain jobs.