CPU Comparison: Intel Core i9-12900KS vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

Key Findings

  • The Intel Core i9-12900KS leads in single-threaded performance by up to 63.0%
  • In multi-threaded workloads, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X shows superior performance with a 43.5% advantage
  • The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X has the highest core count with 32 cores

Performance Rankings & Market Position

Intel Core i9-12900KS

Desktop
Release Date
Q2 2022
Market Position
183rd fastest in multithreading
4890 CPUs37th fastest in single threading
4890 CPUs51st fastest in
1398 Desktop CPUs

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

Desktop
Release Date
Q4 2019
Market Position
72nd fastest in multithreading
4890 CPUs709th fastest in single threading
4890 CPUs15th fastest in
1398 Desktop CPUs

Performance

Single-Thread Performance

i9-12900KS
4,344
3970X
2,665

Multi-Thread Performance

i9-12900KS
44,011
3970X
63,136

Specifications: Intel Core i9-12900KS vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

💻CPU Model
Intel Core i9-12900KS
i9-12900KS
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X
3970X
🔄Other Names
12th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-12900KS, 12th Gen Intel Core i9-12900KS
i9-12900KS
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X 32-Core Processor
3970X
⚡Base Clock
N/A
i9-12900KS
3.7 GHz
3970X
🚀Turbo Clock
N/A
i9-12900KS
4.5 GHz
3970X
💻Cores/Threads
N/A
i9-12900KS
32 Threads: 64
3970X
🔌Socket
LGA 1700
i9-12900KS
sTRX4
3970X
⚡TDP
150 W
i9-12900KS
280 W
3970X
💾Cache
L1 Instruction Cache: 8 x 32 KBL1 Data Cache: 8 x 48 KBL2 Cache: 8 x 1280 KBL3 Cache: 30 MB
i9-12900KS
L1 Instruction Cache: 32 x 32 KBL1 Data Cache: 32 x 32 KBL2 Cache: 32 x 512 KBL3 Cache: 128 MB
3970X

The Intel Core i9-12900KS and AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X compete in the Desktop segment. The Intel Core i9-12900KS shows superior single-thread performance, making it better for tasks like gaming and light workloads.

For multi-threaded applications, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X takes the lead, despite having the same core count.

Power consumption differs significantly, with the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X drawing more power under load (280W vs 150W). This may impact system thermal design and power supply requirements.