CPU Comparison: Intel Core i7-13700KF vs Intel Core i9-9960X @ 3.10GHz
Key Findings
- The Intel Core i7-13700KF leads in single-threaded performance by up to 68.2%
- In multi-threaded workloads, the Intel Core i7-13700KF shows superior performance with a 54.0% advantage
- The Intel Core i9-9960X @ 3.10GHz has the highest core count with 16 cores
Performance Rankings & Market Position
Intel Core i7-13700KF
Release Date
Q4 2022
Market Position
160th fastest in multithreading
4890 CPUs35th fastest in single threading
4890 CPUs44th fastest in
1398 Desktop CPUs
Intel Core i9-9960X @ 3.10GHz
Release Date
Q1 2019
Market Position
331st fastest in multithreading
4890 CPUs768th fastest in single threading
4890 CPUs109th fastest in
1398 Desktop CPUs
Performance
Single-Thread Performance
i7-13700KF
4,364
3.10GHz
2,595
Multi-Thread Performance
i7-13700KF
46,585
3.10GHz
30,254
Specifications: Intel Core i7-13700KF vs Intel Core i9-9960X @ 3.10GHz
💻CPU Model
Intel Core i7-13700KF
i7-13700KF
Intel Core i9-9960X @ 3.10GHz
3.10GHz
🔄Other Names
13th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-13700KF, 13th Gen Intel Core i7-13700KF
i7-13700KF
Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-9960X CPU @ 3.10GHz
3.10GHz
âš¡Base Clock
N/A
i7-13700KF
3.1 GHz
3.10GHz
🚀Turbo Clock
N/A
i7-13700KF
4.4 GHz
3.10GHz
💻Cores/Threads
N/A
i7-13700KF
16 Threads: 32
3.10GHz
🔌Socket
FCLGA1700
i7-13700KF
FCLGA2066
3.10GHz
âš¡TDP
125 W
i7-13700KF
165 W
3.10GHz
💾Cache
L1 Instruction Cache: 8 x 32 KBL1 Data Cache: 8 x 48 KBL2 Cache: 8 x 2048 KBL3 Cache: 30 MB
i7-13700KF
L1 Instruction Cache: 16 x 32 KBL1 Data Cache: 16 x 32 KBL2 Cache: 16 x 1024 KBL3 Cache: 22 MB
3.10GHz
The Intel Core i7-13700KF and Intel Core i9-9960X @ 3.10GHz compete in the Desktop segment. The Intel Core i7-13700KF shows superior single-thread performance, making it better for tasks like gaming and light workloads.
For multi-threaded applications, the Intel Core i9-9960X @ 3.10GHz takes the lead, despite having the same core count.
Power consumption differs significantly, with the Intel Core i9-9960X @ 3.10GHz drawing more power under load (165W vs 125W). This may impact system thermal design and power supply requirements.