AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT vs Intel Core i7-9700F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep for the AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT across every shared benchmark, with the largest gap appearing in heavily threaded workloads. The most striking result is Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the AMD part scores 2230 against the Intel Core i7-9700F's 1126, a 98% advantage. That is nearly double the throughput, and it stems directly from the AMD processor's ability to process 16 threads simultaneously versus the Intel part's 8 threads. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the AMD chip leads by 38.6%, posting 219 points versus 158, which shows that the AMD architecture does not sacrifice per-core efficiency while delivering its multi-threaded dominance.

Geekbench results follow the same pattern but with a narrower margin. The multi-core test shows the Ryzen 7 3800XT at 8561 versus the Core i7-9700F at 6807, a 25.8% lead. Single-core Geekbench gives the AMD processor 1773 against 1509, a 17.5% advantage. The delta shrinks as the workload becomes less parallel, which is expected, but the AMD chip still wins every discipline. The Intel part has no recorded victories in any head-to-head test, with winsA at 4 and winsB at 0.

Looking at average benchmark scores, the AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT averages 3515 across all tests, while the Intel Core i7-9700F averages 3464. That is a small overall gap of roughly 1.5%, but the average masks the distribution: the AMD chip's wins are large in multi-threaded tests, while the Intel part has no single test where it pulls ahead. The percentile rankings reinforce this, with the AMD processor at the 55th percentile of all CPUs and the Intel part at the 54th percentile. Both sit near the middle of the database, but the AMD chip edges ahead in both aggregate score and percentile placement.

The nearest rivals for each processor provide context for interpreting these scores. The Ryzen 7 3800XT sits among the Intel Xeon E-2176G (avg 3502, 0.4% behind) and the Intel Xeon W-2135 (avg 3530, 0.4% ahead). The Core i7-9700F is bracketed by the Intel Xeon E-2186G (avg 3462, 0.1% behind) and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7730U (avg 3456, 0.2% behind). This means both CPUs perform in a similar league overall, but the head-to-head data reveals that within that league, the AMD architecture is consistently faster in every measurable shared test.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmark comparisons?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT wins all four head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core i7-9700F. The Intel part has zero recorded wins.

Q: How much faster is the AMD chip in multi-threaded Cinebench R15?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT scores 2230 versus 1126, which is a 98% improvement. This is the largest performance gap in any shared test.

Q: Is the single-core performance gap as large as the multi-core gap?

A: No. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the AMD chip leads by 38.6% (219 vs 158). In Geekbench single-core, the lead is 17.5% (1773 vs 1509). The AMD advantage is consistent but diminishes in less parallel workloads.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory type?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 memory and use a dual-channel memory bus. However, the AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT has a higher memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s compared to 42.7 GB/s for the Intel Core i7-9700F.

Q: What is the production status of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT is listed as Active in production, while the Intel Core i7-9700F is marked as End-of-life.

Q: How do their overall database percentiles compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT sits at the 55th percentile of all CPUs, and the Intel Core i7-9700F sits at the 54th percentile. The AMD chip holds a slight edge in overall standing.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT uses the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Matisse 2, manufactured on a 7 nm process by TSMC. The Intel Core i7-9700F uses the Coffee Lake architecture, also known as Coffee Lake Refresh, built on Intel's 14 nm process. The process node difference is significant: 7 nm versus 14 nm, which contributes to differences in power efficiency and transistor density.

The AMD chip packs 3,800 million transistors into a 74 mm² die, while the Intel part has no listed transistor count but uses a much larger 180.3 mm² die. This size disparity illustrates the efficiency of the smaller process node. The AMD processor also supports PCIe Gen 4, whereas the Intel part is limited to PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes for CPU-only connectivity. This gives the AMD platform a bandwidth advantage for compatible expansion cards and storage devices.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core, but the AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT has 512 KB of L2 cache per core and a 32 MB L3 cache. The Intel Core i7-9700F has 256 KB of L2 per core and a 12 MB shared L3 cache. The AMD part's larger L3 cache is triple the size of the Intel part's, which can reduce latency for frequently accessed data in multi-threaded workloads.

Threading is the most defining architectural split. The AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT supports simultaneous multithreading, giving it 16 threads across 8 cores. The Intel Core i7-9700F has 8 cores and 8 threads, with no hyper-threading support. This explains the massive Cinebench R15 multi-core delta, as the AMD chip can schedule twice as many threads.

Memory bandwidth also differs, with the AMD part rated at 51.2 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s for the Intel part, despite both using dual-channel DDR4. The AMD processor has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the Intel part's multiplier is locked. Neither processor includes integrated graphics, and neither supports ECC memory.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are the most obvious difference: the AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT offers 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core i7-9700F offers 8 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks differ as well, with the AMD part running at 3.80 GHz and the Intel part at 3.00 GHz. Both boost to 4.70 GHz, matching peak frequency.

Thermal design power is markedly different. The AMD processor is rated at 105 W TDP, while the Intel part draws only 65 W. The AMD chip uses the AMD Socket AM4 platform, and the Intel chip uses Intel Socket 1151. Process nodes differ, with AMD on 7 nm TSMC and Intel on 14 nm. Foundries also differ: TSMC for AMD, Intel for Intel.

Cache configurations are not identical. The AMD part has 512 KB L2 per core and 32 MB L3, while the Intel part has 256 KB L2 per core and 12 MB shared L3. L1 cache is the same at 64 KB per core. Memory bandwidth favors AMD at 51.2 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s. PCIe support favors AMD with Gen 4, versus Intel's Gen 3 with 16 lanes.

Release dates are separated by over a year: the AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT launched on 2020-07-06, and the Intel Core i7-9700F launched on 2019-04-22. The AMD part has a launch MSRP of $399, and the Intel part has a launch MSRP of $333. The AMD part's multiplier is unlocked; the Intel part's is not. The AMD part is currently Active in production, while the Intel part is End-of-life. Part numbers differ: 100-100000279WOF for AMD, SRG14 for Intel.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for users who need maximum throughput: the AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT wins every shared benchmark, and in the most demanding multi-threaded test it is 98% faster than the Intel Core i7-9700F. The 16-thread capability is the decisive factor, as it allows the AMD chip to handle twice as many concurrent tasks. Even in single-core tests, where the Intel part's architecture might be expected to compete, the AMD chip leads by 17.5% to 38.6%. There is no recorded scenario in the database where the Intel Core i7-9700F outperforms the AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT.

For users restricted to the Intel platform, the Core i7-9700F is not without merit. It operates at a lower 65 W TDP, which suggests lower power draw under load, and it has a smaller die size in terms of physical area, though that is due to the older process node. Its locked multiplier means no overclocking, but its 4.70 GHz boost clock matches the AMD part's peak. The Intel chip's production status is End-of-life, which may matter for long-term availability.

The verdict from the benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT is the stronger processor in every measured category. The Intel part's only advantages are a lower TDP and a lower launch MSRP, but neither translates into a performance win. Users who prioritize raw compute should choose the AMD part. Users who prioritize lower power draw or a specific motherboard socket might consider the Intel part, but they will sacrifice significant multi-threaded performance.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT wins in all shared benchmark tests, so its use cases are broad. The largest win, 98% in Cinebench R15 multi-core, indicates it is the clear choice for heavily parallel workloads such as video rendering, 3D scene compilation, scientific simulations, and software compilation. The 16 threads and 32 MB L3 cache support sustained multi-threaded execution. The 25.8% Geekbench multi-core lead reinforces this for diverse, thread-hungry applications. Even in single-threaded tasks, the AMD part wins by 17.5% to 38.6%, so it also suits everyday responsiveness and lightly threaded software.

The Intel Core i7-9700F has no benchmark wins, but its specification profile points to specific strengths outside the recorded tests. Its 65 W TDP means it draws less power, which is relevant for small-form-factor builds or systems with modest cooling and power delivery. The locked multiplier and 8-thread limit make it a simpler, more predictable part for users who do not need overclocking or heavy multi-threading. Its 4.70 GHz boost clock matches the AMD part, so bursty single-threaded tasks may feel similar in practice, even if the recorded single-core scores favor AMD.

In a use-case split, the AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT is the pick for content creators, developers, and anyone running parallel workloads. The Intel Core i7-9700F is the pick for users on a 65 W power budget, those with an existing LGA 1151 motherboard, or those who simply need an 8-core part without hyper-threading and do not require top multi-threaded scores. The database shows no scenario where the Intel part wins a benchmark, but its lower TDP and locked multiplier make it a low-maintenance option for basic desktop use. For every recorded performance metric, the AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT is ahead, and by a wide margin in the most demanding tests.