Intel Core i7-3930K vs Intel Core i7-8709G Comparison

The Intel Core i7-3930K edges out the Intel Core i7-8709G in every single benchmark recorded, but the margins are remarkably thin given the generational gap. Across six Cinebench tests, the 3930K wins by a narrow 3.0-3.3% margin, making this a closer contest than the architecture differences suggest. The 8709G, despite being a mobile part from a later generation, trails by a small but consistent amount in both single-core and multi-core workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The 3930K’s sweep is complete, but none of its victories are decisive. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 3930K scores 701 against the 8709G’s 679, a 3.2% advantage. The single-core R15 test shows the same 3.2% gap, with scores of 98 and 95 respectively. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core result is 2921 for the 3930K versus 2832 for the 8709G, translating to a 3.1% lead. Single-core R20 sees a 3.3% edge, with 412 points against 399.

The most modern test, Cinebench R23, tells the same story. The 3930K posts 6955 multi-core and 981 single-core, while the 8709G manages 6743 and 952. That is a 3.1% multi-core win and a 3.0% single-core win for the older chip. The largest delta is 3.3% in R20 single-core, and the smallest is 3.0% in R23 single-core. In short, the 3930K is consistently about 3% faster everywhere, but the 8709G is never more than a rounding error behind.

Given that the 3930K has six cores and twelve threads against the 8709G’s four cores and eight threads, the multi-core advantage is smaller than expected. The 8709G’s newer Kaby Lake architecture and higher 4.10 GHz boost clock (versus 3.80 GHz) help it close the core-count deficit. The data shows that raw core count alone does not guarantee a win; clock speed and architecture efficiency matter just as much.

Architecture Differences

The 3930K is built on Sandy Bridge-E, a 2011 desktop architecture fabricated on Intel’s 32 nm process with 2,270 million transistors on a 435 mm² die. It supports DDR3 memory over a quad-channel bus, delivering 51.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and offers PCIe Gen 3 with 40 lanes from the CPU. The 8709G, by contrast, uses Kaby Lake-G, a 2018 mobile architecture on the 14 nm node. It supports DDR4 memory, though the data does not list its bus width or bandwidth. The 8709G has no listed PCIe lanes and is a BGA 2270 socket part, indicating it is soldered to the motherboard.

Cache configurations differ too. Both share 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, but the 3930K has 12 MB of shared L3 cache versus 8 MB on the 8709G. The 3930K’s larger L3 cache is a direct consequence of having more cores to feed. The 8709G compensates with a higher boost clock of 4.10 GHz against 3.80 GHz, and a much lower 65 W TDP versus 130 W. The 3930K is an unlocked multiplier part, while the 8709G is locked. The 8709G includes integrated Radeon RX Vega M GH graphics; the 3930K has no integrated graphics at all.

The memory and process node gaps are significant. The 3930K’s quad-channel DDR3 provides theoretical bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, a figure that was impressive in 2011. The 8709G’s DDR4 support on a 14 nm node represents a generational efficiency leap, but the data does not provide its bandwidth numbers. The 8709G is marked as active in production, while the 3930K is end-of-life. The 3930K launched in November 2011 with an MSRP of $583; the 8709G launched in January 2018 with no listed MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i7-3930K has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core i7-8709G has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Is the newer 8709G faster in single-core tests?

A: No. The 3930K wins single-core in all three Cinebench versions. In R15, it scores 98 against 95 (3.2% higher); in R20, 412 against 399 (3.3% higher); and in R23, 981 against 952 (3.0% higher).

Q: What is the memory bandwidth advantage for the 3930K?

A: The 3930K supports quad-channel DDR3 with a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The 8709G supports DDR4, but its memory bus and bandwidth are not listed in the data.

Q: Does the 8709G have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the 8709G includes Radeon RX Vega M GH integrated graphics. The 3930K has no integrated graphics listed.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The 8709G boosts to 4.10 GHz, while the 3930K boosts to 3.80 GHz. The 3930K has a higher base clock at 3.20 GHz versus 3.10 GHz.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The 3930K has a 130 W TDP, while the 8709G has a 65 W TDP. The 8709G draws significantly less power.

Specification Differences

• Cores: 6 (3930K) vs 4 (8709G)
• Threads: 12 (3930K) vs 8 (8709G)
• Base Clock: 3.20 GHz (3930K) vs 3.10 GHz (8709G)
• Boost Clock: 3.80 GHz (3930K) vs 4.10 GHz (8709G)
• TDP: 130 W (3930K) vs 65 W (8709G)
• Socket: Intel Socket 2011 (3930K) vs Intel BGA 2270 (8709G)
• Architecture: Sandy Bridge (3930K) vs Kaby Lake (8709G)
• Process Node: 32 nm (3930K) vs 14 nm (8709G)
• Transistors: 2,270 million (3930K) vs not listed (8709G)
• Die Size: 435 mm² (3930K) vs not listed (8709G)
• L3 Cache: 12 MB shared (3930K) vs 8 MB shared (8709G)
• Memory Support: DDR3 (3930K) vs DDR4 (8709G)
• Memory Bus: Quad-channel (3930K) vs not listed (8709G)
• Memory Bandwidth: 51.2 GB/s (3930K) vs not listed (8709G)
• PCIe: Gen 3, 40 Lanes CPU only (3930K) vs not listed (8709G)
• Integrated Graphics: None (3930K) vs Radeon RX Vega M GH (8709G)
• Market Segment: Desktop (3930K) vs Mobile (8709G)
• Production Status: End-of-life (3930K) vs Active (8709G)
• Release Date: 2011-11-13 (3930K) vs 2018-01-31 (8709G)
• Launch MSRP: $583 (3930K) vs not listed (8709G)
• Multiplier Unlocked: Yes (3930K) vs No (8709G)
• Part Number: SR0GWSR0KY (3930K) vs not listed (8709G)

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i7-3930K wins all six head-to-head tests, but the victory is narrow. With an average benchmark score of 1960 against 1950, the 3930K sits just 0.5% ahead in overall performance. Both processors occupy the 44th percentile among all CPUs, meaning neither is a standout performer in the broader market. The 3930K’s closest rival is the Intel Xeon D-2712T with a delta of -0.2%, while the 8709G’s nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-1035G7 at 0.1% delta.

For pure CPU compute, the 3930K is the better choice, but the margin is so small that it will not be noticeable in most real-world tasks. The 8709G’s advantages lie outside raw CPU benchmarks: it is an active production part, consumes half the power (65 W versus 130 W), and includes integrated Radeon RX Vega M GH graphics. The 3930K counters with more cores, more threads, larger L3 cache, quad-channel memory bandwidth, and an unlocked multiplier for overclocking.

Where Each One Wins

The 3930K wins in every measured CPU benchmark, making it the pick for multi-threaded workloads that scale with cores and cache. Its 6-core/12-thread configuration, 12 MB L3 cache, and 51.2 GB/s quad-channel memory bandwidth make it suited for rendering, encoding, and heavy multitasking. The unlocked multiplier is a clear advantage for users who want to push clock speeds beyond the 3.80 GHz boost, provided they can handle the 130 W TDP. Its desktop segment and Intel Socket 2011 platform also allow for more robust cooling and expansion.

The 8709G wins on efficiency and integration. Its 65 W TDP makes it a better fit for compact or mobile systems where heat and power are constrained. The included Radeon RX Vega M GH graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU for basic display output or light graphics work. Its 4.10 GHz boost clock helps it stay close to the 3930K in single-core tests despite having fewer cores. As an active production part, it is still available for new designs, unlike the end-of-life 3930K. For a system builder prioritizing power consumption and integrated graphics over raw CPU throughput, the 8709G is the logical choice. For anyone who needs maximum CPU compute and has the power budget, the 3930K is the data-backed winner.