CPU Comparison: Intel Core i9-14900F vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

Key Findings

The Intel Core i9-14900F leads in single-threaded performance by up to 67.8%
In multi-threaded workloads, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X shows superior performance with a 33.5% advantage
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X has the highest core count with 32 cores

Performance Rankings & Market Position

Intel Core i9-14900F

Desktop

Release Date

Q1 2024

Market Position

155th fastest in multithreading

4890 CPUs32nd fastest in single threading

4890 CPUs42nd 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

i9-14900F

4,472

3970X

2,665

Multi-Thread Performance

i9-14900F

47,298

3970X

63,136

Specifications: Intel Core i9-14900F vs AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

💻CPU Model

Intel Core i9-14900F

i9-14900F

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X

3970X

🔄Other Names

Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-14900F

i9-14900F

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X 32-Core Processor

3970X

⚡Base Clock

N/A

i9-14900F

3.7 GHz

3970X

🚀Turbo Clock

N/A

i9-14900F

4.5 GHz

3970X

💻Cores/Threads

N/A

i9-14900F

32 Threads: 64

3970X

🔌Socket

FCLGA1700

i9-14900F

sTRX4

3970X

⚡TDP

65 W

i9-14900F

280 W

3970X

💾Cache

L1 Instruction Cache: 8 x 32 KBL1 Data Cache: 8 x 48 KBL2 Cache: 8 x 2048 KBL3 Cache: 36 MB

i9-14900F

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 i9-14900F and AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X compete in the Desktop segment. The Intel Core i9-14900F 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 65W). This may impact system thermal design and power supply requirements.