CPU Comparison
Intel Core i9-7920X vs Intel Core i9-9980XE
A side-by-side comparison of specs, performance and value. The Intel Core i9-7920X is a 12-core, 24-thread high-end desktop processor from the Skylake-X generation on LGA2066, featuring 44 PCIe 3.0 lanes, quad-channel DDR4-2666, and AVX-512 support. It launched in August 2017 at $1,199 and is now discontinued, positioning it as a legacy option for multi-threaded workloads and enthusiast platforms that need abundant I/O. Despite its age, it retains value for specific upgrade scenarios where the X299 platform and expansion are priorities, though modern CPUs deliver far better efficiency and per-thread performance.
The Bottom Line
Overview & Launch
Specifications Compared
Performance Compared
Productivity
Strong multi-threaded performance for its era; still usable for rendering and encoding if power and platform age are acceptable.
Strong multi-threaded performance in rendering, encoding, and other heavily threaded applications, though core-for-core efficiency lags newer architectures.
Gaming
Acceptable frame rates in many titles, but modern gaming CPUs with higher clocks and newer architectures will outpace it.
Still capable of high-refresh-rate gaming and often faster than Threadripper in lightly threaded titles, but newer mainstream CPUs with higher IPC and efficiency generally surpass it for pure gaming.
Virtualization
Plenty of cores, threads, and PCIe lanes make it a solid choice for multiple VMs and storage devices.
Excellent for running multiple VMs thanks to 18 cores, 36 threads, quad-channel memory, and abundant PCIe lanes for storage and networking.
Efficiency
At 14 nm and 140 W base TDP, the 7920X draws significantly more power per unit of performance than newer parts.
High power consumption and heat output under load; requires robust cooling and a quality PSU, especially when overclocked.
Specialized Performance
AI / ML
- No dedicated AI accelerators; AI workloads rely on AVX-512 and general-purpose compute.
- Useful for small-scale inference prototyping or running traditional ML workloads on CPU.
- No dedicated AI acceleration like Intel DL Boost or AVX-512 BF16.
- AVX-512 is present, but focused on traditional HPC/rendering workloads.
- Only suitable for CPU-based AI inference or small models; GPU acceleration is preferred for serious AI work.
Content Creation
Gaming
- Single-core Turbo Boost Max 3.0 up to 4.4 GHz helps in CPU-limited titles.
- Lacks the high clocks and IPC gains of newer CPUs, so GPU-heavy games at high resolutions are the best fit.
- PCIe 3.0 is adequate for current GPUs, though Gen4/Gen5 offer more headroom for fast NVMe and future cards.
- Strong single-threaded and light-threaded performance thanks to high turbo clocks.
- Often outperforms 1st- and 2nd-gen Threadripper in games at similar core counts.
- Modern gaming-focused CPUs (e.g., Intel 13th/14th gen, AMD Ryzen 7000) are usually faster and more efficient.
Industry Impact
Best CPU by Use Case
Target Audience
Strengths & Weaknesses
Pros
- 12 cores and 24 threads for heavily threaded workloads.
- 44 PCIe 3.0 lanes for multi-GPU and NVMe configurations.
- Quad-channel DDR4-2666 with up to 128 GB capacity.
- AVX-512 support with 2 FMA units for vectorized compute.
- Unlocked multiplier for enthusiast tuning.
Cons
- Discontinued platform with no upgrade path beyond Cascade Lake-X refresh.
- Higher power consumption and heat compared to newer architectures.
- Base clock is modest at 2.9 GHz; all-core boost is 4.3 GHz.
- No integrated graphics; requires a discrete GPU.
- Lacks modern platform features (DDR5, PCIe 4.0+).
Pros
- 18 cores and 36 threads for demanding multi-threaded workloads.
- 44 PCIe 3.0 lanes for multi-GPU and high-speed storage configurations.
- Quad-channel DDR4-2666 with up to 128 GB capacity and high bandwidth.
- Solder thermal interface material improves cooling and turbo behavior.
- Unlocked multiplier for overclocking on X299 motherboards.
- Strong all-round performance in both lightly and heavily threaded tasks.
Cons
- Very high street price at launch and weak value versus AMD Threadripper.
- High power consumption and heat output, requiring robust cooling and PSU.
- 14nm++ process is now outdated, with much more efficient alternatives available.
- No integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU.
- Discontinued platform with no upgrade path beyond LGA2066/X299.
- AVX-512 and feature set lag newer Intel and AMD architectures for some workloads.
Competitors & Alternatives
Intel Core i9-7920X
- AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920XRival
HEDT
- AMD Ryzen 9 5900XRival
Mainstream Enthusiast
- Compare head-to-headAMD Ryzen 9 7900XRival
Mainstream Enthusiast
- RivalCompare head-to-head
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i7-14700KRival
Mainstream Enthusiast
Intel Core i9-9980XE
- AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950XRival
HEDT / Creator
- AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WXRival
HEDT / Workstation
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i9-10980XERival
HEDT / Workstation
- Compare head-to-headIntel Core i9-7980XERival
HEDT / Workstation
- Intel Xeon W-3175XRival
Workstation
- AMD Ryzen 9 7950XAlt
Much more efficient, modern platform (AM5, DDR5, PCIe 5.0), and strong creator performance at a lower price point.
Far better gaming and single-threaded performance with higher efficiency on a mainstream platform, though with fewer PCIe lanes.
Compare head-to-head- AMD Ryzen Threadripper (3rd gen or later)Alt
Higher core counts, more PCIe lanes, and better multi-threaded performance for serious workstation use.
- AMD Ryzen 9 7900Alt
More balanced performance-per-watt and modern features if you don’t need extreme core counts or lots of PCIe lanes.
Our Verdict on Each
A capable 12-core HEDT chip with strong multi-threaded throughput and excellent I/O, but high power draw, an aging platform, and discontinued status make it relevant mainly for used-market upgrades or extending existing X299 builds.
Best for: Upgrading an existing X299 system at low cost (used CPU) to gain cores and PCIe lanes without replacing motherboard and memory.
Read the full reviewA very powerful HEDT CPU with strong multi-threaded performance and excellent I/O, but high power consumption and a steep price make it hard to recommend over AMD’s Threadripper alternatives unless you specifically need Intel’s platform features.
Best for: Used or heavily discounted upgrade for an existing X299 workstation where you need maximum cores and PCIe lanes without replacing the motherboard.
Read the full reviewFrequently Asked Questions
Which is better, Intel Core i9-7920X or Intel Core i9-9980XE?
Based on our editorial ratings, the Intel Core i9-9980XE comes out ahead with a score of 8.2/10. 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, Intel Core i9-7920X or Intel Core i9-9980XE?
For gaming, the Intel Core i9-9980XE leads with a gaming performance score of 80/100 among Intel Core i9-7920X and Intel Core i9-9980XE.
Which uses less power?
The Intel Core i9-7920X has the lowest rated TDP. Power draw across these chips: Intel Core i9-7920X (140 W), Intel Core i9-9980XE (165 W).
Do Intel Core i9-7920X and Intel Core i9-9980XE use the same socket?
No. They use different sockets (Intel Core i9-7920X: LGA2066 (FCLGA2066), Intel Core i9-9980XE: FCLGA2066), so each needs a compatible motherboard.
Which has more cores?
The Intel Core i9-9980XE has the most cores. Core counts: Intel Core i9-7920X (12 cores), Intel Core i9-9980XE (18 cores).