AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X vs Intel Core i9-10900KF Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database reveals a stark split between these two desktop processors. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X dominates the Cinebench suite, while the Intel Core i9-10900KF takes a clear lead in Geekbench. The head-to-head records show six wins for AMD across the Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests, both single-core and multi-core, against two wins for Intel in Geekbench.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Threadripper 2920X scores 21,380 against the Core i9-10900KF's 18,867, a 13.3% advantage. That margin holds almost exactly across the entire Cinebench family: R15 multi-core shows 2,154 versus 1,901, and R20 multi-core shows 8,979 versus 7,924, each also a 13.3% delta. The single-core Cinebench results tell the same story. R15 single-core shows 304 against 268, a 13.4% lead for AMD. R20 single-core shows 1,267 versus 1,118, and R23 single-core shows 3,018 versus 2,663, both at 13.3%. This consistency across all three Cinebench generations is notable; the Threadripper's advantage is not an artifact of one particular workload version.

The Geekbench results flip the script entirely. In Geekbench multi-core, the Intel chip scores 10,733 against AMD's 7,473, a 30.4% lead for Intel. Geekbench single-core is similarly decisive: Intel scores 1,744 against 1,266, a 27.4% margin. These are large deltas, far larger than the Cinebench gaps in either direction. The data suggests these two chips respond very differently to the workload characteristics of each benchmark suite. Cinebench appears to favor the Threadripper's architecture, while Geekbench clearly favors the Intel design.

Looking at the broader database context, the Threadripper 2920X has an average benchmark score of 5,730, placing it in the 61st percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7351 at 5,710 (0.4% behind), the AMD EPYC 7F32 at 5,703 (0.5% behind), and the Intel Xeon W-2175 at 5,770 (0.7% ahead). The Core i9-10900KF averages 5,316, sitting in the 60th percentile, with rivals like the AMD EPYC 7281 at 5,315 (a 0% delta) and the Intel Core i9-9900X at 5,301 (0.3% behind). The Threadripper's average score is about 7.8% higher than the Core i9's, though both sit near the same percentile tier.

Where Each One Wins

The use-case split is clear from the benchmark data. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X wins every Cinebench test, which means it holds the edge in rendering workloads that scale with core count and in single-threaded rendering tasks as well. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21,380 is a strong indicator for 3D rendering, video encoding, and other heavily threaded content creation tasks. The single-core Cinebench wins, with scores like 3,018 in R23, suggest the Threadripper also handles lightly threaded rendering pipelines competently.

The Intel Core i9-10900KF wins both Geekbench tests, and wins them by a wide margin. The Geekbench multi-core score of 10,733 versus 7,473 is a 30.4% difference, which is substantial. Geekbench single-core at 1,744 versus 1,266 is a 27.4% gap. This points to Intel's favor in general-purpose computing, everyday productivity, and workloads that Geekbench's test suite represents, such as encryption, compression, and image processing. The 3DMark results for Intel, though not directly compared here, show a range from 850 single-thread to 8,919 max-threads, indicating strong scaling in that suite as well.

The win count in the head-to-head is 6-2 in favor of AMD. However, the magnitude of Intel's Geekbench victories matters. A 30.4% multi-core lead is larger than any of AMD's 13.3% Cinebench margins. The data suggests that for users prioritizing Cinebench-style rendering, the Threadripper is the clear choice. For users prioritizing Geekbench-style general performance, the Core i9 is decisively ahead. The choice between these two is essentially a choice between two different performance profiles.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two chips is substantial. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X uses the Zen+ architecture, codenamed Colfax, built on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It has 12 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The transistor count is 9,600 million across a die size of 2x 213 mm². The Intel Core i9-10900KF uses the Comet Lake architecture, built on Intel's 14 nm process, with 10 cores and 20 threads, a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. Intel's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

Cache configurations differ significantly. AMD uses a per-core layout: 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a total of 32 MB of L3 cache. Intel uses 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3. The Threadripper's larger L3 and per-core L2 give it a cache hierarchy advantage in capacity. Memory support also diverges. Both support DDR4, but AMD uses a quad-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 93.9 GB/s, while Intel uses a dual-channel bus with 46.9 GB/s. That is a 2x bandwidth difference, which could matter in memory-sensitive workloads.

PCIe lane counts are another major differentiator. The Threadripper 2920X provides 60 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, while the Core i9-10900KF provides 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. This gives AMD a massive advantage for multi-GPU setups, NVMe storage arrays, and other high-bandwidth expansion. The Threadripper uses AMD Socket SP3r2, while Intel uses Socket 1200. Both chips have unlocked multipliers for overclocking. The Threadripper's TDP is 180 watts, the Core i9's is 125 watts, reflecting the higher core count and memory bandwidth demands of the AMD part. Neither has integrated graphics. The Threadripper's production status is active, while the Core i9 is end-of-life.

FAQ

Q: Which chip has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i9-10900KF has a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X has a boost clock of 4.30 GHz.

Q: How do they compare in Cinebench R23 single-core?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X scores 3,018, which is 13.3% ahead of the Intel Core i9-10900KF's 2,663.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X has 60 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel Core i9-10900KF has 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes.

Q: What is the Geekbench multi-core difference?

A: The Intel Core i9-10900KF scores 10,733 in Geekbench multi-core, which is 30.4% ahead of the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X's 7,473.

Q: Do both chips support ECC memory?

A: No. Neither the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X nor the Intel Core i9-10900KF supports ECC memory, according to the database.

Q: How does the average benchmark score compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X has an average benchmark score of 5,730, placing it in the 61st percentile, while the Intel Core i9-10900KF averages 5,316, in the 60th percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X | Intel Core i9-10900KF |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 12 | 10 |

| Threads | 24 | 20 |

| Base clock | 3.50 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.30 GHz | 5.30 GHz |

| TDP | 180 W | 125 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket SP3r2 | Intel Socket 1200 |

| Architecture | Zen+ (Colfax) | Comet Lake |

| Process node | 12 nm (GlobalFoundries) | 14 nm (Intel) |

| Transistors | 9,600 million | Not recorded |

| Die size | 2x 213 mm² | Not recorded |

| L1 cache | 96 KB per core | 64 KB per core |

| L2 cache | 512 KB per core | 256 KB per core |

| L3 cache | 32 MB | 20 MB shared |

| Memory bus | Quad-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 93.9 GB/s | 46.9 GB/s |

| PCIe lanes | Gen 3, 60 lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3, 16 lanes (CPU only) |

| Release date | 2018-10-02 | 2020-04-29 |

| Production status | Active | End-of-life |

| Launch MSRP | $649 | $509 |

| Part number | YD292XA8UC9AF | SRH92 |

The release dates show nearly two years between them, with the Threadripper arriving in October 2018 and the Core i9 in April 2020. The Intel chip has a higher base and boost clock, but AMD counters with more cores, threads, cache, memory bandwidth, and PCIe lanes. The Threadripper's process node is smaller at 12 nm versus 14 nm. Both are unlocked, both lack integrated graphics, and both target the desktop segment. The Intel part is end-of-life, while the AMD part remains active in production.