The Core i9-9960X is the comparison's loser – it's a slightly slower gaming CPU than the Core i7-9700 and it's also a much worse value for money, as it's $1109.20 more expensive!
Advantages of the Core i9-9960X
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously – 32 vs 8 threads
Advantages of the Core i7-9700
- A slightly faster CPU for gaming
- Up to 79% cheaper – $290.79 vs $1399.99
- A much better value for money for gaming
- Consumes up to 61% less energy – 65 vs 165 Watts
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU as it has integrated graphics
Core i9-9960X vs Core i7-9700
The CPU's performance in selected game and settings
Core i9-9960X
Oct 19th, 2018
Average FPS
201
98%
Min 1% FPS
138
98%
Price, $
$1399.99
20%
Value, $/FPS
$6.96/FPS
20%
Core i7-9700
Apr 23rd, 2019
Average FPS
206
100%
Min 1% FPS
141
100%
Price, $
$290.79
100%
Value, $/FPS
$1.41/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i9-9960X vs Core i7-9700 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i9-9960X vs Core i7-9700 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i9-9960X
Oct 19th, 2018
Cores
16-core
100%
L3 Cache
22 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.1 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.5 GHz
96%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Core i7-9700
Apr 23rd, 2019
Cores
8-core
50%
L3 Cache
12 MB
55%
Base Frequency
3 GHz
97%
Turbo Frequency
4.7 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of all specifications
Core i9-9960X | SpecificationsComparison of all specifications | Core i7-9700 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Oct 19th, 2018 | Release Date | Apr 23rd, 2019 |
| $1,684.00 | MSRP | $333.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| Intel Socket 2066 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
| Skylake-X | Codename | Coffee Lake |
| 165 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Performance | ||
16 | Cores | 8 |
32 | Threads | 8 |
3.1 GHz | Base Frequency | 3.0 GHz |
| 4.5 GHz | Turbo Frequency | 4.7 GHz |
22 MB | L3 Cache | 12 MB |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR4 @ 2666 MHz | RAM | DDR4 @ 2666 MHz |
| No | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 630 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |
