AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X vs Intel Core i7-12700T Comparison

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X and Intel Core i7-12700T are both 12-core desktop processors, yet they represent radically different design philosophies and market positions. The data shows a fascinating split: the Threadripper 2920X dominates every Cinebench workload, while the Core i7-12700T wins decisively in Geekbench. This benchmark database page examines the head-to-head numbers, architectural differences, and what those results imply for different usage scenarios.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X has 24 threads across its 12 cores, while the Intel Core i7-12700T has 20 threads across its 12 cores.

Q: What is the single biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest delta is in Geekbench single-core, where the Intel Core i7-12700T scores 2089 versus the AMD’s 1266, a 39.4% advantage for Intel.

Q: Are there any benchmark categories where the AMD wins by the same margin every time?

A: Yes, across all six Cinebench tests (R15, R20, and R23, both multi-core and single-core), the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X wins by exactly 18.7% or 18.8% in every case.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X has an average benchmark score of 5730, while the Intel Core i7-12700T averages 5606. Both sit at the 61st percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The Intel Core i7-12700T boosts to 4.70 GHz, which is higher than the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X’s 4.30 GHz boost clock.

Q: What memory configurations do the two support?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X supports quad-channel DDR4 with a memory bandwidth of 93.9 GB/s, while the Intel Core i7-12700T supports dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5 memory, though its bandwidth figure is not listed.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the choice is workload-dependent. For any Cinebench-based rendering task, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X is the clear winner, holding a consistent 18.7% advantage in both multi-core and single-core tests. The Threadripper’s 21380 Cinebench R23 multi-core score versus Intel’s 18012 makes it the stronger choice for sustained multi-threaded rendering workloads.

However, the Intel Core i7-12700T wins in Geekbench by a substantial margin—35% in multi-core and 39.4% in single-core. This suggests that for applications that resemble Geekbench’s mixed workload patterns, the Intel part offers dramatically better performance. The data indicates that the Threadripper 2920X is optimized for Cinebench-style workloads, while the i7-12700T excels in Geekbench-style tasks.

Considering the power envelope, the Intel Core i7-12700T has a 35W TDP versus the AMD’s 180W TDP. The Intel’s performance in Geekbench comes at a fraction of the power draw, making it the more efficient choice for those workloads. The AMD’s higher TDP is a tradeoff for its Cinebench dominance, but the data does not quantify thermals or power consumption beyond these TDP figures.

The verdict is straightforward: pick the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X for Cinebench-rendering pipelines, and pick the Intel Core i7-12700T for Geekbench-style general productivity and single-threaded responsiveness. The 61st percentile ranking for both indicates neither is a top-tier performer overall, but each has clear strengths.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data reveals a striking pattern. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD scores 2154 against Intel’s 1815, yielding an 18.7% delta. The single-core R15 test shows a similar gap: 304 versus 256, an 18.8% advantage for AMD. This consistency carries through R20, where the AMD posts 8979 multi-core and 1267 single-core, against Intel’s 7565 and 1067, respectively—again 18.7% deltas.

Cinebench R23 continues the trend. The AMD’s 21380 multi-core score beats Intel’s 18012, and its 3018 single-core beats Intel’s 2542, both by 18.7%. This uniform margin across three generations of Cinebench tests suggests a fundamental architectural advantage for AMD in that benchmark’s rendering engine, likely tied to its thread count advantage (24 vs 20) and possibly its cache configuration.

The Geekbench results flip the script entirely. In multi-core, the Intel Core i7-12700T scores 11502 versus the AMD’s 7473, a 35% swing in Intel’s favor. The single-core Geekbench test is even more lopsided: Intel scores 2089 versus AMD’s 1266, a 39.4% gap. This is a dramatic reversal—the same two processors that are nearly identical in Cinebench performance are wildly divergent in Geekbench.

The data implies that Geekbench’s workload mix rewards the Intel’s higher boost clock (4.70 GHz vs 4.30 GHz) and newer Alder Lake architecture, while Cinebench rewards the AMD’s higher thread count and larger L3 cache. The 18.7% Cinebench delta is suspiciously uniform, suggesting a scaling factor tied directly to the 24-thread versus 20-thread difference, while the Geekbench deltas point to a more complex set of microarchitectural factors.

Specification Differences

The core count is identical at 12, but the thread counts differ: the AMD has 24 threads, the Intel has 20. The base clocks are starkly different, with the AMD at 3.50 GHz and the Intel at 1400.00 MHz (1.40 GHz), though the Intel’s boost clock of 4.70 GHz exceeds the AMD’s 4.30 GHz boost. The TDPs are the most dramatic difference: the AMD draws 180W, while the Intel is rated at just 35W.

The AMD uses an AMD Socket SP3r2, while the Intel uses Intel Socket 1700. Memory support differs in both channel count and type: the AMD supports quad-channel DDR4 with a listed bandwidth of 93.9 GB/s, while the Intel supports dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5, with no bandwidth figure listed. The AMD’s PCIe implementation is Gen 3 with 60 lanes (CPU only), whereas the Intel has Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only).

The Intel has integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 770), while the AMD has none listed. The AMD has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel is locked. The launch MSRP for the AMD is $649, and the Intel’s launch MSRP is $339. The Intel lists a part number of SRL4S, while the AMD’s is YD292XA8UC9AF. The AMD’s release date is listed as 2018-10-02, while the Intel’s release date is not provided.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X is built on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries, using the Zen+ architecture with the Colfax codename. It is part of the 2000 series Ryzen Threadripper generation. The Intel Core i7-12700T uses a 10 nm process at Intel, employing the Alder Lake architecture with the Alder Lake-S codename, part of the Core 12th Gen series.

The AMD’s die size is listed as 2x 213 mm², with 9,600 million transistors. The Intel’s die size is 215 mm², with no transistor count listed. The cache structures differ significantly: the AMD has 96 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 32 MB of L3 cache. The Intel has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 25 MB of shared L3. The AMD’s larger L3 (32 MB vs 25 MB) likely contributes to its Cinebench performance, while the Intel’s larger per-core L2 (1.25 MB vs 512 KB) may help its Geekbench results.

Neither processor supports ECC memory, and neither has any 3D V-Cache. The AMD’s memory bandwidth of 93.9 GB/s, enabled by its quad-channel bus, contrasts with the Intel’s dual-channel setup, which has no bandwidth figure listed. The AMD’s two-die design (2x 213 mm²) versus Intel’s single 215 mm² die reflects their different manufacturing approaches, with the AMD using a multi-chip module and the Intel using a monolithic die.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X wins in all Cinebench workloads, both multi-core and single-core, with a consistent 18.7% margin. This makes it the superior choice for any application that uses the Cinebench rendering engine or similar multi-threaded 3D rendering tasks. Its 24 threads and 32 MB of L3 cache provide a clear advantage in this specific workload. The AMD’s quad-channel memory bus with 93.9 GB/s bandwidth also supports memory-intensive rendering tasks.

The Intel Core i7-12700T wins decisively in Geekbench, with a 35% multi-core and 39.4% single-core advantage. This indicates that for general-purpose computing tasks that mirror Geekbench’s synthetic workload mix—which includes encryption, compression, image processing, and physics simulations—the Intel is the faster processor. Its higher boost clock of 4.70 GHz and newer Alder Lake architecture give it a substantial edge in these more diverse workloads. The Intel’s 35W TDP also makes it far more suitable for power-constrained systems.

The Intel’s integrated UHD Graphics 770 provides a functional GPU where the AMD has none, which is a practical win for systems without a discrete graphics card. The Intel’s smaller 215 mm² die and newer 10 nm process suggest better manufacturing efficiency, though the AMD’s older 12 nm process with 9,600 million transistors across two dies offers higher raw transistor count.

For users prioritizing Cinebench-based rendering, the AMD’s 21380 versus 18012 R23 multi-core score is the deciding factor. For users prioritizing Geekbench-style productivity, the Intel’s 2089 versus 1266 single-core score is overwhelming. The wins are mutually exclusive, and the choice depends entirely on which benchmark suite better represents the target workload.