Key Differences
In short — Core i9-11900F outperforms the cheaper Ryzen Threadripper 1900X on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Ryzen Threadripper 1900X is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-11900F is 1293 days newer than the cheaper Ryzen Threadripper 1900X.
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
- Up to 31% cheaper than Core i9-11900F - £163.79 vs £238.88
- Up to 31% better value when playing Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands than Core i9-11900F - £0.86 vs £1.24 per FPS
Advantages of Intel Core i9-11900F
- Performs up to 1% better in Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands than Ryzen Threadripper 1900X - 192 vs 190 FPS
- Consumes up to 64% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X - 65 vs 180 Watts
Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Aug 31st, 2017
FPS
190
98%
Value, £/FPS
£0.86/FPS
100%
Price, £
£163.79
100%
Value Winner
Buy for £163.79 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 156 minutes ago
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
FPS
192
100%
Value, £/FPS
£1.24/FPS
69%
Price, £
£238.88
68%
FPS Winner
Buy for £238.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 155 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Aug 31st, 2017
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X | vs | Intel Core i9-11900F |
---|---|---|
Aug 31st, 2017 | Release Date | Mar 16th, 2021 |
Ryzen Threadripper | Collection | Core i9 |
Whitehaven | Codename | Rocket Lake |
AMD Socket SP3r2 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 8 |
16 | Threads | 16 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.5 GHz |
4.0 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.2 GHz |
180 W | TDP | 65 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
38.0x | Multiplier | 25.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |