Ryzen 5 2600X vs i9-7900X

Aggregate performance score

Core i9-7900X
2017
10 cores / 20 threads, 140 Watt
13.25
+51.3%
Ryzen 5 2600X
2018
6 cores / 12 threads, 95 Watt
8.76

Core i9-7900X outperforms Ryzen 5 2600X by an impressive 51% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i9-7900X and Ryzen 5 2600X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking560863
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.879.21
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesCore i9 (Desktop)AMD Ryzen 5
Power efficiency8.968.73
Architecture codenameSkylake (server) (2017−2018)Zen+ (2018−2019)
Release date26 June 2017 (7 years ago)19 April 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$999$229

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 5 2600X has 221% better value for money than i9-7900X.

Detailed specifications

Core i9-7900X and Ryzen 5 2600X 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 cores10 (Deca-Core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads2012
Base clock speed3.3 GHz3.6 GHz
Boost clock speed4.5 GHz4.25 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/s4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplier3336
L1 cache64 KB (per core)96K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache14 MB (shared)16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm12 nm
Die sizeno data192 mm2
Maximum core temperature95 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data4,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on Core i9-7900X and Ryzen 5 2600X 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1 (Uniprocessor)
SocketSocket R4AM4
Power consumption (TDP)140 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i9-7900X and Ryzen 5 2600X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512SSE4.2, SSE4A, AMD-V, AES, AVX2, FMA3, SHA
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX+-
Turbo Boost Max 3.0+no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Core i9-7900X and Ryzen 5 2600X 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 Ryzen 5 2600X 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 Ryzen 5 2600X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory size128 GB64 GB
Max memory channels42
Maximum memory bandwidth85.33 GB/s46.933 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/A-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i9-7900X and Ryzen 5 2600X.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes4420

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.

i9-7900X 13.25
+51.3%
Ryzen 5 2600X 8.76

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.

i9-7900X 21049
+51.3%
Ryzen 5 2600X 13908

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

i9-7900X 1441
+15.5%
Ryzen 5 2600X 1248

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

i9-7900X 8845
+67.3%
Ryzen 5 2600X 5288

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

i9-7900X 7287
+47%
Ryzen 5 2600X 4958

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

i9-7900X 49738
+66%
Ryzen 5 2600X 29954

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

i9-7900X 2.91
+58.8%
Ryzen 5 2600X 4.62

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

i9-7900X 24
+64%
Ryzen 5 2600X 15

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

i9-7900X 2148
+60.2%
Ryzen 5 2600X 1341

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.

i9-7900X 193
+18.2%
Ryzen 5 2600X 163

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark 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 loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

i9-7900X 2.2
+21.5%
Ryzen 5 2600X 1.81

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

i9-7900X 12.1
+51.3%
Ryzen 5 2600X 8

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

i9-7900X 121
+50.3%
Ryzen 5 2600X 81

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

i9-7900X 217
+4.6%
Ryzen 5 2600X 207

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

i9-7900X 5918
+28.7%
Ryzen 5 2600X 4599

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.25 8.76
Recency 26 June 2017 19 April 2018
Physical cores 10 6
Threads 20 12
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 140 Watt 95 Watt

i9-7900X has a 51.3% higher aggregate performance score, and 66.7% more physical cores and 66.7% more threads.

Ryzen 5 2600X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 months, a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 47.4% lower power consumption.

The Core i9-7900X is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 5 2600X in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i9-7900X and Ryzen 5 2600X, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Core i9-7900X
Core i9-7900X
AMD Ryzen 5 2600X
Ryzen 5 2600X

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.1 216 votes

Rate Core i9-7900X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 2318 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 2600X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i9-7900X or Ryzen 5 2600X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.