Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 1950X outperforms Core i7-3940XM on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen Threadripper 1950X is 1802 days newer than Core i7-3940XM.
Advantages of Core i7-3940XM
- Consumes up to 69% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X - 55 vs 180 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
- Performs up to 27% better in Counter-Strike 2 than Core i7-3940XM - 332 vs 261 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i7-3940XM - 32 vs 8 threads
Counter-Strike 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
My Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Core i7-3940XM
Mobile • Sep 3rd, 2012
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Core i7-3940XM | vs | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Aug 10th, 2017 |
| Core i7 Extreme | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
| Ivy Bridge | Codename | Whitehaven |
| Intel Socket G2 (988B) | Socket | AMD Socket SP3r2 |
Mobile | Segment | Desktop |
| 4 | Cores | 16 |
| 8 | Threads | 32 |
| 3.0 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.4 GHz |
| 3.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 180 W |
| 22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
| 30.0x | Multiplier | 34.0x |
Intel HD 4000 | Integrated Graphics | None |
| Yes | Overclockable | Yes |
