CPU Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons against the Intel Core i9-13900TE. The margins are narrow, between 1.5% and 1.6% in every test, but they are consistent across both single-core and multi-core workloads. The Threadripper 1920's average benchmark score of 5425 sits 1.5% above the i9-13900TE's 5342, a gap that mirrors its nearest-rival delta of +1.5% against the Intel part.

This is not a contest where one chip dominates a specific workload class. The AMD part edges ahead in every single test, making the verdict straightforward for pure performance: the Threadripper 1920 is the faster processor in this pairing. However, the data also shows both CPUs occupy the same percentile tier at 60% of all CPUs, and their average scores are separated by less than 100 points. For workloads that are not Cinebench-bound, the differences would likely be imperceptible.

The i9-13900TE counters with structural advantages that the benchmark scores do not capture. It has 24 cores versus 12, 32 threads versus 24, a 35W TDP versus 140W, and an active production status versus end-of-life. It also includes integrated graphics, supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, and has ECC memory support, none of which apply to the Threadripper 1920. The pick depends on whether raw benchmark wins or platform longevity and efficiency matter more. The data says the Threadripper 1920 wins the performance contest; the surrounding specifications say the i9-13900TE is the more modern, flexible platform.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920 wins everywhere in the benchmark suite. Its Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 1890 beats the i9-13900TE's 1861 by 1.6%. In R15 single-core, it scores 266 versus 262, a 1.5% lead. The pattern repeats in R20 multi-core (7877 vs 7758, +1.5%), R20 single-core (1111 vs 1094, +1.6%), R23 multi-core (18756 vs 18472, +1.5%), and R23 single-core (2647 vs 2607, +1.5%). Every delta is nearly identical, suggesting the AMD chip's advantage is consistent across rendering engine versions and workload types.

The Intel Core i9-13900TE's wins are not in the benchmark numbers but in the platform specifications. It offers 24 cores and 32 threads compared to the Threadripper's 12 cores and 24 threads, giving it double the physical core count. Its 35W TDP is one-quarter of the AMD part's 140W, a massive efficiency gap. The Intel chip also supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, has ECC memory support, includes UHD Graphics 770 integrated graphics, and uses a Gen 5 PCIe interface with 16 lanes. The Threadripper 1920 counters with quad-channel DDR4 memory (85.3 GB/s bandwidth), 60 Gen 3 PCIe lanes, and an unlocked multiplier. For memory bandwidth and PCIe lane count, the AMD part wins; for core count, efficiency, and feature breadth, the Intel part wins.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural eras and design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920 uses the Zen architecture (codename Whitehaven) on a 14nm process from GlobalFoundries, with 9,600 million transistors spread across a dual-die design of 2x 213 mm². It is a first-generation Ryzen Threadripper part in the 1000 series, built for AMD Socket SP3r2, and features 12 cores, 24 threads, a 3.20 GHz base clock, and a 3.80 GHz boost clock. Its cache hierarchy consists of 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 32 MB of L3. It supports DDR4 memory in a quad-channel configuration with 85.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The part is unlocked, allowing overclocking, but it lacks ECC memory support and integrated graphics.

The Intel Core i9-13900TE belongs to the Raptor Lake generation (Raptor Lake-S) on a 10nm Intel process with a 257 mm² die size. It has 24 cores and 32 threads, with a base clock of 1000.00 MHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, the base clock figure is unusual in the data, but the boost clock is clearly higher than the AMD part's. Its TDP is 35W, dramatically lower than the Threadripper's 140W. Cache configuration differs substantially: 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core (four times the AMD part's L2), and 36 MB of shared L3 (12.5% more than the AMD's 32 MB). It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, includes ECC memory support, and has UHD Graphics 770 integrated. It uses Intel Socket 1700 with Gen 5 PCIe (16 lanes) and is not multiplier-unlocked. The Intel part is active production with a release date of 2023-01-03; the AMD part is end-of-life.

Key architectural takeaways: the Intel chip has more cores and threads, a higher boost clock, more L2 and L3 cache, and a far lower TDP. The AMD chip has a larger memory bus (quad-channel vs dual-channel), more PCIe lanes (60 vs 16), and a higher base clock (3.20 GHz vs the i9's listed 1000.00 MHz). The process nodes differ (14nm AMD vs 10nm Intel), and the AMD part uses two dies versus Intel's single-die design.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench benchmarks?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests (R15, R20, R23, both single-core and multi-core), with margins between 1.5% and 1.6% in each.

Q: Does the Intel Core i9-13900TE have more cores?

A: Yes. The i9-13900TE has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Threadripper 1920 has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Intel chip has double the physical cores.

Q: Which processor is more power-efficient?

A: The Intel Core i9-13900TE has a 35W TDP compared to the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920's 140W TDP, a four-fold difference in the listed thermal design power.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Core i9-13900TE supports ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920 does not.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i9-13900TE includes UHD Graphics 770. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920 has no integrated graphics listed.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Threadripper 1920 has an average benchmark score of 5425, which is 1.5% higher than the i9-13900TE's 5342. Both CPUs sit at the 60th percentile of all CPUs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a clean sweep for the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920, though the winning margins are remarkably uniform. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD part scores 1890 against Intel's 1861, a delta of 1.6%. The R15 single-core test shows 266 versus 262, a 1.5% edge. Both results are close, but the AMD chip is consistently ahead.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the pattern holds. Multi-core results show 7877 for the Threadripper 1920 and 7758 for the i9-13900TE, a 1.5% difference. Single-core R20 scores are 1111 and 1094, respectively, again a 1.6% gap. The margins have not widened or narrowed meaningfully from the R15 results, suggesting the two processors scale similarly as the workload intensity increases.

Cinebench R23, the most demanding test in the suite, follows the same trajectory. The AMD part scores 18756 in multi-core versus Intel's 18472, a 1.5% delta. In single-core R23, the scores are 2647 and 2607, another 1.5% difference. Across all six tests, the AMD processor's largest win is 1.6% (R15 multi-core and R20 single-core) and its smallest is 1.5% (all other tests). The Intel chip never wins a single benchmark in this head-to-head set.

The nearest-rival data adds context. The Threadripper 1920's closest rival by average score is the Intel Xeon W-1290P at 5443, a 0.3% difference. The i9-13900TE's nearest rival is the Intel Core i9-10900KF at 5316, a 0.5% gap. Interestingly, the two chips in this comparison are each other's rivals: the Threadripper 1920 sits 1.5% above the i9-13900TE, and the i9-13900TE sits 0.7% above the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X (which scores 5306). This suggests the i9-13900TE is slightly closer to the older 1920X than to the 1920 in average performance, reinforcing the idea that the 1920 is the stronger of the two AMD parts in this comparison.

The benchmark narrative is clear: the Threadripper 1920 wins every test, but by a slender margin that will be irrelevant for most real-world applications. The i9-13900TE's 24 cores and 32 threads do not translate into a Cinebench advantage over the 12-core, 24-thread Threadripper, the AMD part's higher base clock and quad-channel memory bandwidth appear to compensate for its core-count deficit in these specific workloads. For users prioritizing raw rendering scores, the Threadripper 1920 is the pick. For those valuing a modern, low-power platform with integrated graphics and ECC support, the i9-13900TE offers capabilities the AMD part simply does not have.