CPU Comparison: Intel Core i9-12900 vs Intel Core i9-7940X @ 3.10GHz
Key Findings
- The Intel Core i9-12900 leads in single-threaded performance by up to 74.7%
- In multi-threaded workloads, the Intel Core i9-12900 shows superior performance with a 69.6% advantage
- The Intel Core i9-7940X @ 3.10GHz has the highest core count with 14 cores
Performance Rankings & Market Position
Intel Core i9-12900
Release Date
Q2 2022
Market Position
183rd fastest in multithreading
4890 CPUs37th fastest in single threading
4890 CPUs51st fastest in
1398 Desktop CPUs
Intel Core i9-7940X @ 3.10GHz
Release Date
Q3 2017
Market Position
440th fastest in multithreading
4890 CPUs871st fastest in single threading
4890 CPUs146th fastest in
1398 Desktop CPUs
Performance
Single-Thread Performance
i9-12900
4,344
3.10GHz
2,486
Multi-Thread Performance
i9-12900
44,011
3.10GHz
25,954
Specifications: Intel Core i9-12900 vs Intel Core i9-7940X @ 3.10GHz
💻CPU Model
Intel Core i9-12900
i9-12900
Intel Core i9-7940X @ 3.10GHz
3.10GHz
🔄Other Names
12th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-12900KS, 12th Gen Intel Core i9-12900KS
i9-12900
Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-7940X CPU @ 3.10GHz, Intel Core i9-7940X CPU @ 3.10GHz
3.10GHz
âš¡Base Clock
N/A
i9-12900
3.1 GHz
3.10GHz
🚀Turbo Clock
N/A
i9-12900
4.3 GHz
3.10GHz
💻Cores/Threads
N/A
i9-12900
14 Threads: 28
3.10GHz
🔌Socket
LGA 1700
i9-12900
FCLGA2066
3.10GHz
âš¡TDP
150 W
i9-12900
165 W
3.10GHz
💾Cache
L1 Instruction Cache: 8 x 32 KBL1 Data Cache: 8 x 48 KBL2 Cache: 8 x 1280 KBL3 Cache: 30 MB
i9-12900
L1 Instruction Cache: 14 x 32 KBL1 Data Cache: 14 x 32 KBL2 Cache: 14 x 1024 KBL3 Cache: 19 MB
3.10GHz
The Intel Core i9-12900 and Intel Core i9-7940X @ 3.10GHz compete in the Desktop segment. The Intel Core i9-12900 shows superior single-thread performance, making it better for tasks like gaming and light workloads.
For multi-threaded applications, the Intel Core i9-7940X @ 3.10GHz takes the lead, despite having the same core count.
Power consumption differs significantly, with the Intel Core i9-7940X @ 3.10GHz drawing more power under load (165W vs 150W). This may impact system thermal design and power supply requirements.