Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Core i3-10320 outperforms the more expensive Ryzen Threadripper 1920X on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Core i3-10320 is 994 days newer than the more expensive Ryzen Threadripper 1920X.
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-10320 - 24 vs 8 threads
Advantages of Intel Core i3-10320
- Performs up to 3% better in Deathloop than Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - 180 vs 175 FPS
- Up to 47% cheaper than Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - €199.5 vs €379.64
- Up to 49% better value when playing Deathloop than Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - €1.11 vs €2.17 per FPS
- Consumes up to 64% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - 65 vs 180 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X doesn't have integrated graphics
Deathloop
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
FPS
175
97%
Value, €/FPS
€2.17/FPS
51%
Price, €
€379.64
52%
Buy for €379.64 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 119 minutes ago
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
180
100%
Value, €/FPS
€1.11/FPS
100%
Price, €
€199.5
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for €199.5 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 339 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X | vs | Intel Core i3-10320 |
---|---|---|
Aug 10th, 2017 | Release Date | Apr 30th, 2020 |
Ryzen Threadripper | Collection | Core i3 |
Whitehaven | Codename | Comet Lake |
AMD Socket SP3r2 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
12 | Cores | 4 |
24 | Threads | 8 |
3.5 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.8 GHz |
4.0 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.6 GHz |
180 W | TDP | 65 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
35.0x | Multiplier | 38.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 630 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |