Amd threadripper 3960x vs i9

Intel Core i9-10980XE

It will be one of the weapons that Intel will use to respond to AMD's approaches in the enthusiastic sector. Admittedly, its data sheet isn't as attractive as the Threadripper's, but Intel always trusts its efficiency per core. Its price will be around € 1099, so we expect an overwhelming performance from it.

We are facing the best bet that Intel can offer to the most demanding users, be they professionals or gamers . There is no doubt that we will have a battle on the Intel side with this i9-10980XE, but let's not forget that its rival has also done its homework.

Their characteristics are:

Architecture: Cascade Lake-X Compatible Socket: LGA 2066. Heatsink: No. Number of cores: 18. Number of threads: 36. Base clock rate: 3.00 GHz. Boost clock rate: 4.8 GHz. Total L2 cache: 18 MB. Total L3 cache: 24.75 MB. Transistor size: 14nm. RAM frequency: DDR4-2933. TDP: 165W. Maximum temperature: 86º. Price € 1099.

Although its boost clock frequency does not exceed 5 GHz, it can still offer spectacular performance. On the other hand, we would have liked a smaller nanometer manufacturing process to be able to reliably compare with the 3960X.

Mention that it does not bring integrated graphics, since it is a processor focused on the enthusiastic range. For this reason, why integrate graphics if users buy the RTX 2080?

It must be said that its base frequency could be better, but for normal or IDLE use, we don't need all the muscle. Yes it is true that we are very surprised by its TDP with 165W, but it is understandable because it is a range not to skimp on anything.

To highlight as a positive point its support for RAM speeds at 2933 MHz, which makes it a much more interesting processor if possible. With 2400 MHz DDR4 speeds, the Intel processors gave really good results. We really like this upgrade .

AMD Threadripper 3960X

AMD fans are in luck because this T hreadripper 3960X is yet another sign that this company has made a comeback. This third generation of processors comes with many new features that may interest you all. Its price in Europe will be somewhat higher than the $ 1, 399 announced by AMD.

In this sense, we find a chip more expensive than the Intel it is facing, a scenario that is rare with this fact. In principle, it is a solution for professionals and servers, although any enthusiast can equip it without fear of losing performance in some way.

Its main characteristics are:

Architecture: Zen 2 Socket compatible: sTRX4 (LGA 4094). Heatsink: No. Number of cores: 24. Number of threads: 48. Base clock frequency: 3.8 GHz. Boost clock frequency: 4.5 GHz. Total L2 cache: 12 MB. Total L3 cache: 128 MB. Transistor size: 7nm. RAM frequency: DDR4-3200. TDP: 280W. Maximum temperature: 91º. Price € 1400 approx.

Here we see some base frequencies that we like more, although its turbo frequency remains below the i9. That said, the IPC of both should be seen in action because here we are in a war of 7 nanometers against 14 nanometers.

It also does not equip integrated graphics, and it is logical because we are in a range where the user does not look for a processor that includes these.

We like the balance that this 3960X offers because it offers us a lot of power in IDLE, such as high performance in boost . Of course, pay attention to the 280W of TDP What crazy! If you are concerned about the electricity bill, this is not your processor. That said, wait for you later.

Finally, in terms of RAM speeds there is nothing new. We continue to obtain adequate support in the 3200 MHz memories , which is already faster than Intel.

AMD Threadripper 3960X vs Intel Core i9-10980XE

On paper, AMD beats Intel, but, as Leiva would say: "watch out for expectations." We say this because the gross power has been insufficient on some previous occasion, leaving the Intel processor ahead.

It is true that the more the better. Although it should not be forgotten that certain programs take advantage of more or less cores, such as more or less threads. Everything is very relative, but we can get closer to the truth by comparing the performance of both processors on the same tasks.

The eternal debate of single-core and multi-core becomes relevant. Since Ryzen's inception, Intel has argued that its single-core is better. This topic was viewed with suspicion from the eyes of any gamer, since most games focus on single-core efficiency and most take advantage of 4 cores.

Here we have a clash of interests and philosophies: efficiency vs. gross power. Let's take a look at this 3960X vs i9-10980XE showdown.

Synthetic benchmark: 3960X vs i9-10980XE

The i9-10980XE does not stand out for a good performance in Cinebench R15, lagging behind the main Ryzen 5 and Ryzen 7. On the other hand, the Threadripper 3960X is ahead of its rival, but it does not stand out for being a great purchase option in this section.

However, we can experience an upward variation in results, with a performance of 209 cb by both processors, which would place them in the top 10.

We have passed the Cinebench R20 test and we have been very surprised by this result: the 3960X wins by a landslide. Our surprise comes from the incredible performance of the 3960X, which ranks high on the leaderboard.

To thoroughly examine that single-core, we have done the Cinebench single-core test . The result is still clear: Mono-core efficiency is surpassed by AMD technology.

Continuing with Time Spy, the comparative 3960X vs i9-10980XE seems to be taking color in favor of the Threadripper chip. We continue to have great performance from the Intel processor, but we're surprised it doesn't outperform the 9900K.

The i9 takes a breath of fresh air in the 3DMark test because the difference is minimal. On the other hand, we are seeing that AMD's dominance in synthetic benchmarks is more than remarkable, leading the podium this time. Equally, it must be said that the i9 measures up.

We have to go to Wprime to see the first victory of the Intel chip against that of AMD. The performance of the i9 is slightly higher than that of the Threadripper in this test, achieving better response times. This time around, the 10980XE spreads its wings.

In the VRMark test we found two quite different results. On the one hand, the 3960X manages to sneak into the Intel achieving more than a thousand points more than its rival; on the other, the i9 is surpassed by a Ryzen 3600X, a processor that we can buy for approximately € 250.

Neither of them stands out in this test, falling well behind other less powerful processors, such as the i5-9400F or the Ryzen 5 3600. In any case, the Threadripper is ahead of the 14nm Intel .

It is time to test the performance of the read and write speeds of RAM memories with AIDA64. Here the Ryzen ruthlessly smashes the Intel, bringing out 30% better performance than the Intel Core i9 in reading speed.

On the other hand, the writing speed gives an overwhelming result: the writing speed in Ryzen Threadripper 3960X is 1.5 times faster than that of the Core i9-10980XE

Without leaving the RAM memories, we went to check the latency and the results are very tight. The Intel i9 achieves a latency of 3 points less than that of the Threadripper. It is clear that Intel handles this aspect much better than AMD.

Benchmark Gaming (fps): Threadripper 3960X vs i9-10980XE

We know that many of you have entered to see these benchmarks because the vast majority of users want maximum power for their computers. However, power should not be confused with optimization for video games.

WE RECOMMEND YOUThe first VEGA 20 benchmarks appear under FFXV

At the moment, it seems that there is a winner, but it is time to touch on the weak point of AMD: video games.

We have worked with two similar test benches, which are:

We have done the tests in 1080p, 2K and 4K so that you can see the behavior of both processors in these conditions. The configurations have been the following:

Shadow of the Tomb Rider, Alto, TAA + Anisotropico x4, DirectX 12 Far Cry 5, Alto, TAA, DirectX 12 DOOM, Ultra, TAA, Open GL 4.5 Final Fantasy XV, standard, TAA, DirectX 12 Deus EX Mankind Divided, Alto, Anisotropic x4, DirectX 12 Metro Exodus, High, Anisotropic x16, DirectX 12 (without RT)

In 1080p, the difference is made by the video game in question. In the case of the Doom 4, the difference is remarkable because the 3960X marks 141 fps, while the i9 reaches 113 fps. Removing that peculiarity, in all games they perform similarly, without noticeable changes between both processors.

It is the turn of 2K, the future standard. We find the same peculiarity of Doom 4 and the same feeling in other video games: Intel wins in some, AMD in others. Of course, without any noticeable difference because they are usually 5 fps maximum between the two chips.

In the 4K field, the i9 surprises, placing itself ahead in most video games, prevailing with almost 20 fps of difference from the 3960X. That said, the feeling is the same as in previous resolutions.

Consumption and temperatures

For many, the consumption and temperature of the processor is an important aspect because they can vary the electricity bill, such as the environment. To make it as accurate as possible, we display the temperatures with the processor in stock and overclocked.

In stock, we see a rest in which the Ryzen surprises us because it consumes less than the i9. Intel's acclaimed efficiency comes when we stress the processor, consuming the Ryzen nearly 100 watts more. In overclocking, we are again amazed with the 3960X because it continues to consume less while idle. On the other hand, Intel surprises us a lot with 450 watts on load compared to the Threadripper's 323 watts . The i9 almost needs another dedicated power supply for itself.

Conclusion of the comparative 3960X vs i9-10980XE

These two processors have given a more than respectable level in this comparison, but we expected more from Intel. Admittedly, it has a larger litho, fewer cores, fewer threads, and less frequency than the Threadripper.

On the other hand, we are talking about HEDT solutions , so the message of "it is worth less than Ryzen" does not get through. We are in a range where you do not look at the price of the processor, but its performance. Different question is that of other ranges.

In terms of performance, synthetic benchmarks give the Threadripper the winner on the vast majority of occasions. Regarding gaming tests , the difference is negligible, but it seems that the i9 performs better. It must be said that in 4K the i9 has had no rival against the Threadripper.

The differences in RAM memory do seem more important to me because it is something that interests the user a lot. The Ryzen has devastated in this regard, so let's hope that Intel improves its DDR4 performance.

Finally, consumption and temperatures have surprised us. Looking at the technical sheets, most would surely give the i9 the trophy. However, the Ryzen has shown a better behavior in temperatures, such as consumption.

In conclusion, on other occasions, I would say that for Intel gaming, for the rest AMD. After making the comparison, I can only tell you that the most complete processor of the two is the AMD, either for gaming or for something else. We were surprised by the performance of the Intel Core i9-10980XE because we expected a greater difference in gaming but that serial frequency has been left by technical KO.

We recommend reading the best processors on the market

For us, the winner of the duel is the AMD Threadripper 3960X. Which processor do you think is best? Which one would you choose? Have either of you been disappointed? Why?