AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X vs Intel Core i3-10105 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X and Intel Core i3-10105 occupy opposite ends of the desktop spectrum. The Threadripper is a 64-core workstation monster, while the i3 is a modest 4-core budget part. The benchmark data shows a complete sweep in favor of the AMD chip, but the scale of those wins and the specific workloads involved tell a more nuanced story about where each processor belongs in a build.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows the Threadripper 3990X winning all 8 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with the largest margins appearing in multi-threaded workloads. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the AMD chip scores 6866 against the Intel’s 708, a delta of 869.8%. The R20 multicore test shows a similar story: 28612 versus 2952, a 869.2% advantage. Cinebench R23 multicore follows the same pattern, with the Threadripper scoring 68124 against 7029, a 869.2% lead.

The single-core results are equally decisive, though the percentages look almost identical due to the scaling. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Threadripper scores 969 versus 99, a 878.8% delta. R20 single-core shows 4039 versus 416, a 870.9% lead, and R23 single-core records 9617 versus 992, a 869.5% advantage. These numbers indicate that the Zen 2 architecture at 2.90 GHz base and 4.30 GHz boost is vastly faster per thread than the Comet Lake core at 3.70 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost, despite the Intel chip’s higher clock speeds.

Geekbench results narrow the gap somewhat but still favor the AMD part. In multicore, the Threadripper scores 20912 against 4325, a 383.5% lead. The single-core Geekbench test is the closest comparison in the entire dataset: 1472 versus 1319, a delta of just 11.6%. That is the only benchmark where the i3-10105 comes within a meaningful range, and it still loses. The data suggests that for lightly threaded tasks, the Intel chip is competitive in raw speed but not faster.

The overall average benchmark scores place the Threadripper at 12786 against the i3’s 12316. The Threadripper’s percentile versus all CPUs is 68, while the i3 sits at 67. That puts both processors in the same general tier of the database, but the distribution of those scores is wildly different: the Threadripper’s average is pulled up by massive multicore wins, while the i3’s average reflects balanced but modest results across its test suite.

Architecture Differences

The core architectures could not be more different. The Threadripper 3990X uses Zen 2, codenamed Castle Peak, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 64 cores and 128 threads, with a die size of 8x 74 mm² and 30,400 million transistors. The i3-10105 uses Comet Lake-R, a 14 nm Intel process, with 4 cores and 8 threads. The process node difference alone explains much of the performance gap: 7 nm versus 14 nm means the AMD chip can fit far more transistors and cores into a similar power envelope.

Cache hierarchies also diverge sharply. The Threadripper has 64 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, but the headline is the 256 MB of L3 cache. That is a massive pool for the 64-core design. The i3-10105 has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and only 6 MB of shared L3. The 256 MB versus 6 MB difference directly impacts how much data each chip can hold for rapid reuse, particularly in multi-threaded workloads with large working sets.

Memory support differs in both width and bandwidth. The Threadripper uses quad-channel DDR4 with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The i3 uses dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s. That is a 2.4x raw bandwidth advantage for the AMD part, which matters for any workload that streams data through memory, such as rendering or scientific computing. Neither chip supports ECC memory according to the database.

PCIe connectivity is another major split. The Threadripper offers Gen 4 with 64 lanes from the CPU, while the i3 provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes. That difference affects expandability for GPUs, NVMe drives, and other add-in cards. The Threadripper also has an unlocked multiplier, whereas the i3 is locked. The i3 includes integrated UHD Graphics 630, while the Threadripper has no integrated graphics, so the AMD part requires a discrete GPU for display output.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous for multi-threaded work. The Threadripper 3990X beats the i3-10105 by roughly 870% in Cinebench multicore tests and by 383.5% in Geekbench multicore. If the workload scales across cores, the AMD chip is in a different league. The 64 cores and 128 threads, combined with 256 MB of L3 cache and quad-channel memory, make it a clear choice for rendering, compilation, simulation, or any task that can use more than a handful of threads.

The i3-10105 is the pick when the workload is light and the platform is constrained. Its 4 cores and 8 threads are enough for basic desktop use, office applications, and older games. The integrated graphics are a practical advantage for builds without a discrete GPU. The locked multiplier and dual-channel memory are not limiting factors for that class of use. The single-core Geekbench gap of 11.6% means the i3 is not far behind in lightly threaded performance, so interactive responsiveness is not a major penalty.

Neither chip is a substitute for the other. The Threadripper is for serious compute, the i3 for entry-level desktops. The benchmark data confirms that the Threadripper wins every recorded comparison, but the i3 competes in a completely different segment with different platform costs and power requirements.

Specification Differences

• Cores: 64 versus 4
• Threads: 128 versus 8
• Base clock: 2.90 GHz versus 3.70 GHz
• Boost clock: 4.30 GHz versus 4.40 GHz
• TDP: 280 W versus 65 W
• Socket: AMD Socket TRX4 versus Intel Socket 1200
• Process node: 7 nm versus 14 nm
• L2 cache: 512 KB per core versus 256 KB per core
• L3 cache: 256 MB versus 6 MB shared
• Memory bus: Quad-channel versus dual-channel
• Memory bandwidth: 102.4 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s
• PCIe: Gen 4, 64 lanes versus Gen 3, 16 lanes
• Integrated graphics: None versus UHD Graphics 630
• Multiplier: Unlocked versus locked

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in single-threaded workloads?

A: The Threadripper 3990X wins every single-threaded benchmark, but the margin is small. In Geekbench single-core, it scores 1472 versus 1319 for the i3-10105, an 11.6% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the lead is 9617 versus 992, which is 869.5%.

Q: How much faster is the Threadripper in multi-threaded Cinebench tests?

A: The Threadripper is approximately 870% faster across R15, R20, and R23 multicore tests. For example, Cinebench R23 multicore shows 68124 for the AMD part versus 7029 for the Intel part.

Q: Does the i3-10105 have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the i3-10105 includes UHD Graphics 630. The Threadripper 3990X has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Threadripper supports quad-channel DDR4 with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The i3-10105 supports dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s, so the AMD chip has a 2.4x advantage in raw memory throughput.

Q: Can the i3-10105 be overclocked?

A: No, the i3-10105 has a locked multiplier. The Threadripper 3990X has an unlocked multiplier, according to the database.

Q: What is the L3 cache size on each chip?

A: The Threadripper has 256 MB of L3 cache. The i3-10105 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Where Each One Wins

The Threadripper 3990X wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, so the use-case split is about workload type, not performance. The AMD chip is the pick for any task that can leverage 64 cores and 128 threads. Rendering, video encoding, scientific simulation, and large-scale compilation all benefit from the 869% multicore lead in Cinebench and the 383.5% lead in Geekbench multicore. The 256 MB L3 cache and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth support large data sets, and the 64 PCIe Gen 4 lanes allow for multiple GPUs or fast storage arrays.

The i3-10105 wins in scenarios where the Threadripper cannot be used at all. It is a desktop chip for Socket 1200 with integrated graphics, so it fits in compact builds without a discrete GPU. The 65 W TDP means it is easy to cool and power, and the 4.40 GHz boost clock gives it reasonable single-thread responsiveness. The 11.6% single-core Geekbench gap means everyday tasks like browsing, document editing, and light media playback will feel nearly identical on either chip. The i3 also supports dual-channel DDR4 and Gen 3 PCIe, which is sufficient for a basic system.

For a builder with a heavy compute workload, the Threadripper’s 8 head-to-head wins are decisive. For a builder assembling a low-cost, low-power desktop, the i3-10105 offers a practical path with integrated graphics and a locked but capable 4-core design. The data shows no overlap in their intended roles.