Key Differences
In short — Ryzen Threadripper 1920X outperforms Core i7-920XM on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Ryzen Threadripper 1920X is 2878 days newer than Core i7-920XM.
Advantages of Intel Core i7-920XM
- Consumes up to 69% less energy than AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X - 55 vs 180 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X
- Performs up to 28% better in Starfield than Core i7-920XM - 55 vs 43 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i7-920XM - 24 vs 8 threads
Starfield
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
FPS
55
100%
Value, $/FPS
$4.27/FPS
100%
Price, $
$235
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for $235 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 3210 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Mobile • Sep 23rd, 2009
Desktop • Aug 10th, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i7-920XM | vs | AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X |
---|---|---|
Sep 23rd, 2009 | Release Date | Aug 10th, 2017 |
Core i7 Extreme | Collection | Ryzen Threadripper |
Clarksfield | Codename | Whitehaven |
Intel Socket G1 | Socket | AMD Socket SP3r2 |
Mobile | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 12 |
8 | Threads | 24 |
2.0 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.5 GHz |
3.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.0 GHz |
55 W | TDP | 180 W |
45 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
15.0x | Multiplier | 35.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |