Apple M2 vs i9-7900X
Aggregate performance score
Core i9-7900X outperforms Apple M2 by a considerable 41% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i9-7900X and Apple M2 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 560 | 806 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.88 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | Core i9 (Desktop) | Apple Apple M-Series |
| Power efficiency | 8.96 | 44.48 |
| Architecture codename | Skylake (server) (2017−2018) | no data |
| Release date | 26 June 2017 (7 years ago) | 10 June 2022 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $999 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core i9-7900X and Apple M2 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 10 (Deca-Core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 20 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 3.3 GHz | 2.424 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.5 GHz | 3.48 GHz |
| Bus type | DMI 3.0 | no data |
| Bus rate | 4 × 8 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 33 | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 2 MB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 20 MB |
| L3 cache | 14 MB (shared) | no data |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 5 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 72 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 20000 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Core i9-7900X and Apple M2 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 (Uniprocessor) | no data |
| Socket | Socket R4 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 140 Watt | 20 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i9-7900X and Apple M2. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| TSX | + | - |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | + | no data |
Security technologies
Core i9-7900X and Apple M2 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i9-7900X and Apple M2 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i9-7900X and Apple M2. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | no data |
| Maximum memory size | 128 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 4 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 85.33 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | Apple M2 10-Core GPU ( - 1398 MHz) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i9-7900X and Apple M2.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 44 | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core
Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 13.25 | 9.40 |
| Recency | 26 June 2017 | 10 June 2022 |
| Physical cores | 10 | 8 |
| Threads | 20 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 140 Watt | 20 Watt |
i9-7900X has a 41% higher aggregate performance score, and 25% more physical cores and 150% more threads.
Apple M2, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 600% lower power consumption.
The Core i9-7900X is our recommended choice as it beats the Apple M2 in performance tests.
Note that Core i9-7900X is a desktop processor while Apple M2 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i9-7900X and Apple M2, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
