i7-920 vs Ryzen 5 1600

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 5 1600
2017
6 cores / 12 threads, 65 Watt
7.73
+332%
Core i7-920
2008
4 cores / 8 threads, 130 Watt
1.79

Ryzen 5 1600 outperforms Core i7-920 by a whopping 332% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 5 1600 and Core i7-920 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking9632025
Place by popularity55not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.581.22
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Ryzen 5Core i7 (Desktop)
Power efficiency11.251.30
Architecture codenameZen 2 (2017−2020)Bloomfield (2008−2010)
Release date11 April 2017 (7 years ago)November 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$219$340

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 5 1600 has 275% better value for money than i7-920.

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 5 1600 and Core i7-920 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 cores6 (Hexa-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads128
Base clock speed3.2 GHz2.66 GHz
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz2.93 GHz
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/s1333 MHz
Multiplier32no data
L1 cache96K (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)256 KB (per core)
L3 cache16 MB (shared)8 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm45 nm
Die size192 mm2263 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data68 °C
Number of transistors4,800 million731 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 5 1600 and Core i7-920 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
SocketAM4FCLGA1366,PLGA1366
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt130 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 1600 and Core i7-920. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsXFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMTIntel® SSE4.2
AES-NI+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data1.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
PAEno data36 Bit

Security technologies

Ryzen 5 1600 and Core i7-920 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 5 1600 and Core i7-920 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 1600 and Core i7-920. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3
Maximum memory size64 GB24 GB
Max memory channels23
Maximum memory bandwidth42.671 GB/s25.6 GB/s
ECC memory support+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 1600 and Core i7-920.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes20no 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.

Ryzen 5 1600 7.73
+332%
i7-920 1.79

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.

Ryzen 5 1600 12277
+332%
i7-920 2840

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.

Ryzen 5 1600 1084
+161%
i7-920 415

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.

Ryzen 5 1600 4643
+226%
i7-920 1426

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.

Ryzen 5 1600 4538
+17.1%
i7-920 3874

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.

Ryzen 5 1600 25970
+66.7%
i7-920 15576

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.

Ryzen 5 1600 8244
+74.4%
i7-920 4728

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.

Ryzen 5 1600 6.85
+39.7%
i7-920 9.57

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.

Ryzen 5 1600 13
+162%
i7-920 5

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.73 1.79
Physical cores 6 4
Threads 12 8
Chip lithography 14 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 130 Watt

Ryzen 5 1600 has a 331.8% higher aggregate performance score, 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 5 1600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i7-920 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 1600 and Core i7-920, 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.


AMD Ryzen 5 1600
Ryzen 5 1600
Intel Core i7-920
Core i7-920

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 5827 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 1600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 401 vote

Rate Core i7-920 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 5 1600 or Core i7-920, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.