CPU Comparison
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X vs Intel Xeon 698X
A side-by-side comparison of specs, performance and value. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X is a 32-core, 64-thread high-end desktop processor built on the Zen 5 architecture, designed to handle extreme multitasking, heavy rendering, and compute-intensive professional workloads.
The Bottom Line
Overview & Launch
Specifications Compared
Performance Compared
Productivity
Outstanding multi-threaded performance, significantly reducing render and compile times for massive projects.
Intel claims up to 61% higher multi-threaded performance vs the previous 60-core Xeon W9-3595X at the same 350 W TDP, but no single standardized score is available. Real-world productivity depends heavily on workload scaling and memory subsystem usage.
Gaming
Capable but inefficient for gaming due to multi-CCD latency; high cost per frame compared to standard desktop CPUs.
Not designed or benchmarked for gaming; no official gaming scores. High core count does not translate into gaming performance, and latency/clock behavior is tuned for workstation, not game, workloads.
Virtualization
Excellent for local virtualization farms, easily allocating numerous cores and memory to separate VMs.
Strong virtualization potential due to high core count, eight-channel memory, and extensive I/O, but no official benchmark score is available.
Efficiency
Good performance per watt for its core count, but total system power draw remains substantial.
Intel 3 improves efficiency over prior generations, but 350–420 W power levels are still high; efficiency comparisons vs AMD Threadripper Pro depend on specific workloads and platform configurations.
Specialized Performance
AI / ML
- AVX-512 and VNNI instructions accelerate CPU-based inference
- 48 PCIe lanes allow for multiple dedicated AI accelerators
- AMX supports BF16, INT8, and native FP16, important for PyTorch/TensorFlow inference.
- No integrated GPU or dedicated NPU; AI acceleration is CPU-only via AMX and AVX-512.
- Best suited for CPU-based inference, small-to-medium model training, and data preprocessing rather than large-scale GPU training.
Content Creation
Gaming
- Not targeted at gamers
- High latency from chiplet design impacts high-refresh-rate gaming
- Single-core speed is good, but platform is not optimized for game engines
- Not targeted at gaming; no official gaming benchmarks.
- High core count does not benefit most games, and many games won’t use more than a fraction of the available threads.
- Single-threaded performance is competitive, but gaming-focused CPUs will provide better value and often higher effective FPS per dollar.
Industry Impact
Best CPU by Use Case
Target Audience
Strengths & Weaknesses
Pros
- 32 Zen 5 cores provide extreme multi-threaded performance
- Significant IPC uplift over the previous generation
- Unlocked multiplier for overclocking
- Quad-channel DDR5 with 2TB capacity
- 48 PCIe 5.0 lanes
Cons
- Very high platform cost
- Overkill for gaming and light content creation
- High TDP requires expensive cooling solutions
- 4-channel memory can bottleneck 32 cores in bandwidth-heavy tasks compared to PRO
- No integrated graphics
Pros
- 86 cores and 172 threads for highly parallel workloads.
- 336 MB L3 cache improves performance on large data sets.
- Eight-channel DDR5/MRDIMM memory with up to 4 TB capacity.
- 128 PCIe 5.0 lanes for multi-GPU and storage-heavy configurations.
- Intel 3 process and Redwood Cove+ cores improve performance and efficiency over Sapphire Rapids.
- AMX with native FP16 acceleration for AI inference.
- Unlocked multiplier for overclocking, supported by Intel and partners.
Cons
- Very high power consumption (350 W base, up to 420 W turbo) requiring robust cooling and power supply.
- Expensive, with street prices around $8,300–$8,500 for the CPU alone.
- New platform (W890 chipset, LGA4710) with early-adoer considerations and limited long-term platform history.
- No integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU for display output.
- Gaming and lightly threaded workloads see little benefit relative to cheaper, lower-core-count CPUs.
Competitors & Alternatives
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i9-14900KRival
High-End Desktop
- Intel Xeon w7-2495XRival
Workstation
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i9-10980XERival
High-End Desktop
- Compare head-to-headAMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9975WXRival
Workstation
- Apple M2 Ultra (Mac Studio)Rival
Creative Workstation
A more cost-effective HEDT option if 24 cores are sufficient for your workload.
Compare head-to-head- AMD Ryzen 9 9950XAlt
Much cheaper consumer alternative for workloads that do not require massive PCIe lanes or quad-channel memory.
- AMD Ryzen Threadripper 7970XAlt
Previous generation HEDT 32-core, potentially available at a discount.
Intel Xeon 698X
- AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9995WXRival
Workstation
- AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WXRival
Workstation
- Compare head-to-headAMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970XRival
HEDT/Workstation
- Compare head-to-headIntel Xeon w9-3595XRival
Workstation (previous gen)
- Compare head-to-headIntel Xeon 696XRival
Workstation (same gen, lower core count)
Our Verdict on Each
A phenomenal HEDT processor that hits the sweet spot between frequency and core count, leveraging Zen 5 to deliver exceptional performance for creators who need more than mainstream desktops can offer.
Best for: You are a professional creator or researcher whose workflow is heavily bound by multi-threaded compute performance, such as long 3D animation renders or complex fluid dynamics simulations, and you require an unlocked multiplier for enthusiast tuning.
Read the full reviewAn extremely powerful workstation CPU with best-in-class core count, memory capacity, and I/O for the Xeon 600 platform, best suited for professional workflows that can saturate its 86 cores and 128 PCIe lanes.
Best for: Professional workstations for rendering, simulation, AI development, or data processing that can leverage 86 cores, eight-channel memory, and 128 PCIe 5.0 lanes in a single socket.
Read the full reviewFrequently Asked Questions
Which is better, AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X or Intel Xeon 698X?
Based on our editorial ratings, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X comes out ahead with a score of 9.2/10. That said, the best choice depends on your workload — check the spec and performance breakdown above for gaming, productivity and efficiency differences.
Which is faster for gaming, AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X or Intel Xeon 698X?
For gaming, the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X leads with a gaming performance score of 60/100 among AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X and Intel Xeon 698X.
Do AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X and Intel Xeon 698X use the same socket?
No. They use different sockets (AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X: sTR5, Intel Xeon 698X: FCLGA4710), so each needs a compatible motherboard.
Which has more cores?
The Intel Xeon 698X has the most cores. Core counts: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X (32 cores), Intel Xeon 698X (86 cores).
Which is faster in multi-core benchmarks?
The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X posts the highest multi-core benchmark score. Multi-core results: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 9970X (56,000), Intel Xeon 698X (0). Benchmark figures are approximate and workload-dependent.