Technology content trusted in North America and globally since 1999
8,254 Reviews & Articles | 62,619 News Posts

AMD Threadripper vs. Intel Core i9 CPUs Clock for Clock

By: Steven Bassiri | Editorials in CPUs, Chipsets & SoCs | Posted: Oct 22, 2017 4:46 pm

Power Consumption




Intel's Skylake-X CPUs love to glump power, and that's partially due to the new mesh interconnect. While at stock the two CPUs have similar power consumption numbers when we overclock Intel's numbers shoot through the roof, which isn't an amazing thing.



Concluding Analysis




At stock, if we set the 1950X as the standard, we are getting roughly 29% more overall, 26% more in gaming, and 28% more productivity performance from the 7960X compared to the 1950X. However, the kicker is, you would also be paying 78% more for the 7960X, meaning you would be getting 30% more performance for 80% more cost. That actually isn't that uncommon in high-performance devices, and that's because as they break into these higher niche areas, price scales exponentially.



Once you remove buyers who value "price vs. performance", then you get into another subset of buyers. However, if you need 16 cores, and you don't want to sell a kidney for it, then at stock the 1950X is an extremely powerful option, especially for its price. If money is not an issue (for most it is), then Intel does offer a bit more.




Now let's take a look at the same type of difference at the 4GHz clock for clock. The price gap remains, so the Intel costs roughly 80% more. We see Intel offer roughly 31% overall, 36% gaming, and 24% productivity performance increases over AMD. Compared to stock, Intel's margins increase 2% overall in overall performance and 8% in gaming performance. However, Intel's margin in productivity decreases from 28% to 24%, meaning Intel's margin over AMD at 16 cores has decreased 4% in productivity applications.


However, while Intel's power consumption was 12% higher at stock, it's now 16% higher overclocked (includes idle and load). Putting the Intel 7960X and AMD 1950X head to head, clock for clock, reveals three major trends. Intel's performance gains over AMD's decrease in productivity applications, but increase by a larger margin in gaming applications, resulting in a slight increase in overall performance.


At the same time, Intel's power consumption increases 4% while overall performance margins only increase 2%-3%. There are other factors to take into account, and this article isn't about telling you which CPU to buy, rather it's looking at how AMD's microarchitecture is doing against Intel's in the high-end desktop segment, so far, quite good.

    We at TweakTown openly invite the companies who provide us with review samples / who are mentioned or discussed to express their opinion of our content. If any company representative wishes to respond, we will publish the response here.

Related Tags

Got an opinion on this content? Post a comment below!