Intel Core i9-10900X vs Intel Core i9-9920X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear split between the two processors, with the Intel Core i9-9920X winning six of the eight recorded head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core i9-10900X takes the remaining two. The most consistent pattern emerges in the Cinebench suite, where the i9-9920X holds a uniform advantage across every version and workload type. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i9-9920X scores 2121 against 1910 for the i9-10900X, a delta of 11%. The single-core R15 test shows a nearly identical margin, 299 versus 269, which translates to an 11.2% lead for the older processor. This consistency carries into Cinebench R20, where the multicore result is 8839 for the i9-9920X versus 7961 for the i9-10900X (11%), and the single-core result is 1247 versus 1123 (11%). Cinebench R23 follows the same script: multicore scores of 21046 and 18957 (11%), and single-core scores of 2971 and 2676 (11%).

The i9-9920X's wins are not narrow or workload-specific; they are uniform across the entire Cinebench family, both in threaded and lightly threaded scenarios. Every Cinebench test, regardless of version or thread count, lands at an 11% delta in favor of the i9-9920X, with the sole exception of R15 single-core at 11.2%. This suggests a structural advantage in rendering and CPU-bound creative workloads rather than a test-specific quirk.

The i9-10900X, however, flips the script in Geekbench. In the multicore test, it scores 10104 against 9422 for the i9-9920X, a 6.7% advantage. The single-core Geekbench test also favors the i9-10900X, with 1438 versus 1393, a 3.1% margin. These results indicate that the newer processor excels in the specific workload mix that Geekbench represents, which tends to emphasize a broader set of everyday tasks, memory patterns, and integer performance. The data shows two processors with complementary strengths: the i9-9920X dominates sustained render workloads, while the i9-10900X pulls ahead in Geekbench's generalized test suite.

Looking at the aggregate numbers, the i9-9920X has an average benchmark score of 5917 across all recorded tests, while the i9-10900X averages 5555. That is a 362-point gap, or roughly 6.5% in favor of the i9-9920X. Both processors sit at the 61st percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they occupy the same overall performance tier despite the internal differences in benchmark outcomes.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share the same fundamental Intel design lineage but differ in meaningful architectural details. The i9-9920X uses the Skylake-X architecture on a 14 nm process node, with a die size of 484 mm². The i9-10900X uses Cascade Lake-X, also on 14 nm, but the database records no die size for it. Both are built by Intel and both use the Intel Socket 2066 platform.

Core counts differ: the i9-9920X has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the i9-10900X has 10 cores and 20 threads. That two-core, four-thread gap explains much of the Cinebench multicore advantage, since Cinebench scales well with additional physical cores. The i9-9920X also has a lower base clock at 3.50 GHz compared to 3.70 GHz on the i9-10900X, and a lower boost clock at 4.50 GHz versus 4.70 GHz. Despite the clock deficit, the i9-9920X still wins all Cinebench tests, which points to the core count advantage outweighing the clock speed disadvantage in those workloads.

Cache configurations are identical in structure: 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 19.25 MB of shared L3 cache on both chips. Memory support is DDR4 with a quad-channel bus on both. The database records a memory bandwidth figure of 85.3 GB/s for the i9-9920X, but no corresponding figure for the i9-10900X, so a direct comparison on that metric is not possible from the recorded data.

PCIe support differs in the recorded details. The i9-9920X lists PCIe Gen 3 with 44 lanes (CPU only), while the i9-10900X simply lists PCIe Gen 3 without a lane count. Both support ECC memory as false, both have no integrated graphics, and both have an unlocked multiplier.

Production status separates the two as well. The i9-9920X is marked end-of-life, while the i9-10900X is marked active. Release dates are exactly one year apart: the i9-9920X launched on 2018-10-18 and the i9-10900X on 2019-10-18.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward choice based on workload priorities. For users whose primary applications resemble Cinebench, meaning sustained multi-threaded rendering and CPU-bound content creation, the Intel Core i9-9920X is the stronger pick. It wins every Cinebench test in the database by 11% or 11.2%, and it does so despite lower clock speeds, which indicates that its additional two cores and four threads are doing the heavy lifting in those scenarios. The i9-9920X also holds the higher aggregate average score (5917 versus 5555) and matches the i9-10900X at the 61st percentile overall.

For users whose workloads align more closely with Geekbench, the Intel Core i9-10900X is the better option. It leads by 6.7% in Geekbench multicore and 3.1% in Geekbench single-core. This suggests that in mixed everyday usage, lighter threaded applications, or tasks that favor higher clocks and the Cascade Lake refresh, the i9-10900X has a measurable edge. The i9-10900X also remains an active production part, while the i9-9920X is end-of-life, which may matter for system builders looking for ongoing availability.

Neither processor is a clear overall winner in absolute terms. The i9-9920X wins more tests and has the higher average score, but the i9-10900X wins the Geekbench pair and posts higher clock speeds. The decision rests on which benchmark family better represents the intended use case.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i9-9920X | Intel Core i9-10900X |

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

| Cores | 12 | 10 |

| Threads | 24 | 20 |

| Base clock | 3.50 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.50 GHz | 4.70 GHz |

| Architecture | Skylake | Cascade Lake |

| Codename | Skylake-X | Cascade Lake-X |

| Generation | Core i9 (X-Series 9th Gen) | Core i9 (X-Series 10th Gen) |

| Die size | 484 mm² | Not recorded |

| Memory bandwidth | 85.3 GB/s | Not recorded |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 44 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3 |

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

| Release date | 2018-10-18 | 2019-10-18 |

| Launch MSRP | $1189 | Not recorded |

Fields not listed above, including L1, L2, and L3 cache sizes, TDP, socket, process node, memory type, memory bus, ECC support, integrated graphics, market segment, and unlocked multiplier, are identical between the two processors.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmark tests?

A: The Intel Core i9-9920X wins six of the eight recorded head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core i9-10900X wins two.

Q: How large is the Cinebench advantage for the i9-9920X?

A: The i9-9920X leads by 11% in Cinebench R15 multicore, R20 multicore, R20 single-core, R23 multicore, and R23 single-core. Its R15 single-core lead is 11.2%.

Q: Where does the i9-10900X outperform the i9-9920X?

A: The i9-10900X wins Geekbench multicore by 6.7% (10104 versus 9422) and Geekbench single-core by 3.1% (1438 versus 1393).

Q: Do the two processors have the same cache layout?

A: Yes, both have 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 19.25 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the core and thread difference between them?

A: The i9-9920X has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the i9-10900X has 10 cores and 20 threads.

Q: Which processor has higher clock speeds?

A: The i9-10900X has a higher base clock (3.70 GHz versus 3.50 GHz) and a higher boost clock (4.70 GHz versus 4.50 GHz).

Where Each One Wins

The i9-9920X wins in every Cinebench variant recorded, covering both multicore and single-core tests across R15, R20, and R23. These are render-focused workloads that scale with core count, and the i9-9920X's 12 cores and 24 threads give it a consistent 11% edge over the 10-core, 20-thread i9-10900X. The i9-9920X also carries the higher aggregate average score at 5917, and it matches the i9-10900X at the 61st percentile across all CPUs. For rendering, video encoding, 3D modeling, or any threaded production task that behaves like Cinebench, the recorded data favors the i9-9920X.

The i9-10900X wins in Geekbench multicore and single-core, which represents a more generalized mix of integer, floating-point, and memory-access workloads. Its higher base and boost clocks likely contribute to this result, as does the Cascade Lake architecture refresh. For everyday desktop use, application responsiveness, or workloads that resemble Geekbench's test patterns, the i9-10900X is the stronger choice according to the data. Additionally, its active production status means it remains available in the current market, whereas the i9-9920X is end-of-life.