Ryzen 7 2700X vs i9-9900K

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i9-9900K
2018
8 cores / 16 threads, 95 Watt
11.93
+4.2%

Core i9-9900K outperforms Ryzen 7 2700X by a minimal 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i9-9900K and Ryzen 7 2700X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking673698
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.739.22
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesCore i9 (Desktop)AMD Ryzen 7
Power efficiency11.459.94
Architecture codenameCoffee Lake-R (2018−2019)Zen+ (2018−2019)
Release date8 October 2018 (6 years ago)13 April 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$488$329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 7 2700X has 19% better value for money than i9-9900K.

Detailed specifications

Core i9-9900K and Ryzen 7 2700X 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads1616
Base clock speed3.6 GHz3.7 GHz
Boost clock speed5 GHz4.3 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/s4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplierno data37
L1 cache512 KB768 KB
L2 cache2 MB4 MB
L3 cache16 MB (shared)16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm12 nm
Die size178 mm2213 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data4800 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on Core i9-9900K and Ryzen 7 2700X 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)
SocketLGA-1151AM4
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt105 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i9-9900K and Ryzen 7 2700X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2SSE4.2, 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+-
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
SIPP+-
Precision Boost 2no data+

Security technologies

Core i9-9900K and Ryzen 7 2700X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
MPX+-
Identity Protection+-
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i9-9900K and Ryzen 7 2700X are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i9-9900K and Ryzen 7 2700X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory size128 GB64 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth44.668 GB/s46.933 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel UHD Graphics 630-
Max video memory64 GB-
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+-
Clear Video HD+-
Graphics max frequency1.2 GHz-
InTru 3D+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i9-9900K and Ryzen 7 2700X integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3-

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Core i9-9900K and Ryzen 7 2700X integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support+-
Max resolution over HDMI 1.44096 x 2304@24Hz-
Max resolution over eDP4096 x 2304@60Hz-
Max resolution over DisplayPort4096 x 2304@60Hz-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core i9-9900K and Ryzen 7 2700X integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12-
OpenGL4.5-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i9-9900K and Ryzen 7 2700X.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes1620

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.

i9-9900K 11.93
+4.2%
Ryzen 7 2700X 11.45

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.

i9-9900K 18260
+4.2%
Ryzen 7 2700X 17517

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.

i9-9900K 1701
+35.5%
Ryzen 7 2700X 1255

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.

i9-9900K 8045
+31.3%
Ryzen 7 2700X 6128

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.

i9-9900K 7933
+50.9%
Ryzen 7 2700X 5256

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.

i9-9900K 48779
+40.3%
Ryzen 7 2700X 34763

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

i9-9900K 14282
+34.2%
Ryzen 7 2700X 10643

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.

i9-9900K 3.58
Ryzen 7 2700X 3.48
+2.9%

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.

i9-9900K 21
+14.5%
Ryzen 7 2700X 19

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

i9-9900K 1979
+12.3%
Ryzen 7 2700X 1762

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.

i9-9900K 212
+20.7%
Ryzen 7 2700X 176

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.

i9-9900K 2.38
+22.1%
Ryzen 7 2700X 1.95

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.

i9-9900K 11.1
+4.7%
Ryzen 7 2700X 10.6

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.  

i9-9900K 114
+9.3%
Ryzen 7 2700X 105

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.  

i9-9900K 261
+14.9%
Ryzen 7 2700X 227

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.

i9-9900K 7633
+59.7%
Ryzen 7 2700X 4779

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

i9-9900K 8845
+26%
Ryzen 7 2700X 7022

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

i9-9900K 1300
+10.5%
Ryzen 7 2700X 1177

7-Zip Single

i9-9900K 5411
+16.4%
Ryzen 7 2700X 4647

7-Zip

i9-9900K 48207
+5.2%
Ryzen 7 2700X 45814

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.93 11.45
Recency 8 October 2018 13 April 2018
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 105 Watt

i9-9900K has a 4.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 months, and 10.5% lower power consumption.

Ryzen 7 2700X, on the other hand, has a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Core i9-9900K and Ryzen 7 2700X.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i9-9900K and Ryzen 7 2700X, 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 i9-9900K
Core i9-9900K
AMD Ryzen 7 2700X
Ryzen 7 2700X

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.


3.8 2349 votes

Rate Core i9-9900K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 2887 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 2700X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i9-9900K or Ryzen 7 2700X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.