Intel Atom x7433RE vs Intel Core i9-9920X Comparison

FAQ

Q: How large is the performance gap between the Intel Core i9-9920X and the Intel Atom x7433RE?

A: The Core i9-9920X wins all five head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The largest gap is in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the i9-9920X scores 1247 versus the Atom's 209, a 496.7% difference. Multi-core gaps are similarly large, with the i9-9920X leading by roughly 495% across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Core i9-9920X has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Atom x7433RE has 4 cores and 4 threads. The i9-9920X also offers a higher base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, compared to the Atom's 1.50 GHz base and 3.40 GHz boost.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The Core i9-9920X has a TDP of 165 watts, whereas the Atom x7433RE has a TDP of just 9 watts. This makes the Atom dramatically more power-efficient, though the i9-9920X delivers far higher raw performance in every recorded benchmark.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. Neither the Core i9-9920X nor the Atom x7433RE supports ECC memory. Both support DDR4, but the Atom adds DDR5 support as well, while the i9-9920X is limited to DDR4.

Q: What are the socket and form factor differences?

A: The Core i9-9920X uses Intel Socket 2066 and is a desktop part, while the Atom x7433RE uses Intel BGA 1264 and is classified as a mobile processor. The i9-9920X has an unlocked multiplier, while the Atom's multiplier is locked.

Q: Which processor is newer and still in production?

A: The Atom x7433RE was released in April 2024 and is marked as Active in production status. The Core i9-9920X was released in October 2018 and is marked as End-of-life.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i9-9920X is the far stronger performer, winning every single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21046 versus the Atom's 3535 represents a 495.4% advantage, and the single-core gap is even larger at 495.4% in the same test. Anyone needing serious compute throughput should pick the i9-9920X without hesitation.

However, the Intel Atom x7433RE has a completely different role. Its 9 watt TDP, compared to the i9-9920X's 165 watts, makes it suitable for low-power, embedded, or mobile scenarios where energy consumption is the primary constraint. The Atom also supports DDR5 memory and includes integrated UHD Graphics 32EU, features the i9-9920X lacks. For workloads that prioritize efficiency over brute force, the Atom is the logical choice.

The average benchmark scores tell a nuanced story. The i9-9920X averages 5917 across all recorded tests, while the Atom averages 5601. Both sit at the 61st percentile among all CPUs in the database. The i9-9920X's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7451 (average 5915, delta 0%) and the Intel Xeon W-2170B (average 5985, delta -1.1%). The Atom's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-12700T (average 5606, delta -0.1%) and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 (average 5610, delta -0.2%). This shows the Atom, despite its low power envelope, competes with mainstream desktop chips in average score, while the i9-9920X sits in server-class territory.

The verdict for buyers: choose the i9-9920X for rendering, multi-threaded computation, or any task where raw speed matters. Choose the Atom x7433RE for fanless designs, battery-powered devices, or industrial applications where its 9 watt TDP and integrated graphics provide a clear advantage.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core i9-9920X dominates every recorded head-to-head test, with deltas consistently around 495%. The Cinebench R15 multi-core test shows the i9-9920X scoring 2121 versus the Atom's 356, a 495.8% lead. The Cinebench R20 multi-core test follows the same pattern: 8839 versus 1484, a 495.6% advantage. Single-core results are similar, with Cinebench R20 single-core showing 1247 versus 209, a 496.7% gap.

The Cinebench R23 multi-core test reinforces this trend, with the i9-9920X scoring 21046 against the Atom's 3535, a 495.4% delta. The Cinebench R23 single-core test shows 2971 versus 499, also a 495.4% difference. These results indicate that the i9-9920X is roughly six times faster than the Atom in both single-threaded and multi-threaded Cinebench workloads.

The Atom does have additional benchmark data outside the head-to-head set, including PassMark tests. Its PassMark single-thread score is 1568, and its PassMark multithread score is 4159. These numbers show the Atom can handle light single-threaded tasks reasonably well for its power class, but the i9-9920X's Cinebench scores dwarf the Atom's in every comparable metric.

The recorded data shows no scenario where the Atom outperforms the i9-9920X. The wins column for the i9-9920X stands at 5, with 0 wins for the Atom. This is a complete sweep, with the performance margin consistent across all tested workloads.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The i9-9920X has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Atom has 4 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks are 3.50 GHz versus 1.50 GHz, and boost clocks are 4.50 GHz versus 3.40 GHz. The TDP difference is extreme: 165 watts for the i9-9920X versus 9 watts for the Atom.

Memory support diverges as well. The i9-9920X uses DDR4 with a quad-channel memory bus and 85.3 GB/s bandwidth. The Atom supports both DDR4 and DDR5 but uses a single-channel memory bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The i9-9920X offers 44 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, while the Atom offers 9 PCIe Gen 3 lanes.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The i9-9920X has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 19.25 MB shared L3. The Atom has 96 KB L1 per core, 2 MB shared L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The i9-9920X has a die size of 484 mm² on a 14 nm process, while the Atom's die size is not recorded, but it uses a 10 nm process.

The i9-9920X is a desktop processor with an unlocked multiplier, socketed as Intel Socket 2066. The Atom is a mobile processor with a locked multiplier, socketed as Intel BGA 1264. The i9-9920X has no integrated graphics, while the Atom includes UHD Graphics 32EU. The i9-9920X was released in October 2018 and is end-of-life, while the Atom was released in April 2024 and remains active.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is fundamental. The i9-9920X uses the Skylake-X architecture, specifically the Skylake codename, and belongs to the Core i9 X-Series 9th Generation. It is built on a 14 nm process at Intel's foundry. The Atom x7433RE uses the Amston Lake architecture with the Gracemont core generation, built on a 10 nm process. This generation gap explains part of the efficiency difference, though the i9-9920X's larger core count and higher clocks drive its performance advantage.

Cache hierarchy design differs as well. The i9-9920X uses a per-core L2 design with 1 MB per core, while the Atom uses a shared 2 MB L2 across all cores. The i9-9920X has a much larger L3 cache at 19.25 MB shared, compared to the Atom's 6 MB shared L3. The Atom has larger L1 per core at 96 KB versus the i9-9920X's 64 KB, but this does not compensate for the overall cache capacity difference.

The i9-9920X's quad-channel memory controller with 85.3 GB/s bandwidth is a server-class feature, while the Atom's single-channel controller at 38.4 GB/s is typical of low-power designs. The i9-9920X's 44 PCIe lanes provide extensive expansion capability, whereas the Atom's 9 lanes are minimal. The Atom's integrated UHD Graphics 32EU adds a GPU capability that the i9-9920X entirely lacks, making the Atom a complete system-on-chip solution.

The production status also reflects their positioning: the i9-9920X is end-of-life, while the Atom is active, indicating the Atom represents Intel's current low-power direction. The i9-9920X's unlocked multiplier and desktop socket make it a high-end enthusiast or workstation part, while the Atom's BGA socket and locked multiplier target embedded and mobile designs.

Where Each One Wins

The i9-9920X wins in every performance benchmark recorded. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21046 versus 3535 makes it the clear choice for rendering, video encoding, 3D modeling, and any multi-threaded compute workload. The single-core scores, 2971 versus 499 in Cinebench R23, also favor the i9-9920X for tasks that depend on single-thread speed, such as legacy applications or lightly threaded games. The i9-9920X's 24 threads and 19.25 MB L3 cache support heavy parallel workloads, and its 85.3 GB/s memory bandwidth reduces bottlenecks in data-intensive operations. Its 165 watt TDP is a cost of that performance, but the benchmark data shows no compromise in speed.

The Atom x7433RE wins in efficiency and integration. Its 9 watt TDP is a fraction of the i9-9920X's 165 watts, enabling passive cooling, battery operation, and deployment in thermally constrained environments. The integrated UHD Graphics 32EU eliminates the need for a separate GPU, simplifying system design. DDR5 support provides a modern memory path, and the 10 nm process node offers a more contemporary manufacturing technology. The Atom's average benchmark score of 5601, close to the i9-9920X's 5917, suggests that for its power class, it punches above its weight, rivaling mainstream desktop chips like the Intel Core i7-12700T and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 3700 in the database's aggregate scoring.

The use-case split is clear. The i9-9920X is for high-performance computing, professional workstations, and any task where speed is paramount. The Atom x7433RE is for embedded systems, fanless industrial PCs, edge devices, and portable hardware where power draw and physical footprint matter more than raw throughput. The data shows no overlap in their intended roles: one is a performance flagship, the other an efficiency leader.