i9-9940X vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen Threadripper 1950
2017
16 cores / 32 threads, 180 Watt
14.43
Core i9-9940X
2018
14 cores / 28 threads, 165 Watt
18.28
+26.7%

Core i9-9940X outperforms Ryzen Threadripper 1950 by a significant 27% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Core i9-9940X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking524349
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data5.16
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Seriesno dataIntel Core i9
Power efficiency7.3110.10
Architecture codenameZen (2017−2020)Skylake (server) (2017−2019)
Release date29 July 2017 (7 years ago)8 October 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,387

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Core i9-9940X 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 cores16 (Hexadeca-Core)14 (Tetradeca-Core)
Threads3228
Base clock speed3.2 GHz3.3 GHz
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz4.5 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 3.0
Bus rateno data4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplierno data33
L1 cache96K (per core)896 KB
L2 cache512 KB (per core)14 MB
L3 cache32 MB19.25 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Die size213 mm2484 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data88 °C
Number of transistors9,600 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Core i9-9940X 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 configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
SocketSP3r2FCLGA2066
Power consumption (TDP)180 Watt165 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Core i9-9940X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data2.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSX-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+

Security technologies

Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Core i9-9940X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Core i9-9940X are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Core i9-9940X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Quad-channelDDR4-2666
Maximum memory sizeno data128 GB
Max memory channelsno data4
Maximum memory bandwidthno data85.33 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Core i9-9940X.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data44

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 Threadripper 1950 14.43
i9-9940X 18.28
+26.7%

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 Threadripper 1950 22077
i9-9940X 27975
+26.7%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.43 18.28
Recency 29 July 2017 8 October 2018
Physical cores 16 14
Threads 32 28
Power consumption (TDP) 180 Watt 165 Watt

Ryzen Threadripper 1950 has 14.3% more physical cores and 14.3% more threads.

i9-9940X, on the other hand, has a 26.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 9.1% lower power consumption.

The Core i9-9940X is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen Threadripper 1950 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen Threadripper 1950 and Core i9-9940X, 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 Threadripper 1950
Ryzen Threadripper 1950
Intel Core i9-9940X
Core i9-9940X

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.


4.4 20 votes

Rate Ryzen Threadripper 1950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 38 votes

Rate Core i9-9940X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen Threadripper 1950 or Core i9-9940X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.