OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Core i9-10940X review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£880PassMark multi-core score:27665N. of physical cores:14CPU boost clock speed:4.8 GHzCPU socket:LGA2066TDP (Thermal design power):165 W

Intel Core i9-10940X Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 3 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

Intel Core i9-10940X
7.4/10

Overall score

Score
7.4/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 75% of models
Score components

40%

7.5

Technical score

25%

7.4

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–²Better than 75% of processors
6.9

Value for money

Value for money
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 75% of models
Score components

70%

7.4

Overall score

30%

5.9

Price

â–¼Worse than 75%
7.5

Technical score

Technical score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 76% of models
Score components

60%

8.2

Performance

18%

6.2

Architecture

10%

7.7

Memory & PCIe

7%

4.5

Power & Thermal

4%

8.2

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 76%
7.4

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.4/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 53% of models

80%

7.4

Average grade

20%

7.4

Popularity

Grades by review (3)
1 review, its grade estimated from the review text. 2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 53%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • intel-core-i9-10940x
  • intel-core-i9-10940x
  • intel-core-i9-10940x
  • intel-core-i9-10940x
intel-core-i9-10940x
intel-core-i9-10940x
intel-core-i9-10940x
intel-core-i9-10940x
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i9-10940X

Technical score
Technical score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 76% of models
Score components:

60%

8.2

Performance

18%

6.2

Architecture

10%

7.7

Memory & PCIe

7%

4.5

Power & Thermal

4%

8.2

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

7.5
Reviews score
7.4
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 75% of models
Score components:

70%

7.4

Overall score

30%

5.9

Price

6.9
Processor type
workstation
This processor belongs to the workstation processor class, which is more advanced than that of 95.4% of processors and equal to that of 4.6% of processors.
CPU socket
LGA2066
This processor uses the LGA2066 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 73.4% of processors and equal to that of 1.4% of processors.
Chipset
X299
This processor supports X299 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 95.5% of processors and equal to that of 1.5% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3, AES
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3, AES instruction sets, which is narrower support than 51.6% of processors and equal to that of 0.8% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
14
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 14 CPU cores, which is more than 85.7% of processors and equal to 4.3% of processors.
CPU threads
28
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 28 CPU threads, which is more than 94.2% of processors and equal to 0.6% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.8 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.8 GHz which is higher than that of 69.2% of processors and equal to that of 4.4% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
14x 3.3 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 14x3.3 GHz which is higher than that of 93.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
27,665
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 27,665 in PassMark, which is higher than 83.7% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
14 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 14 nm process node, which is older than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 32.9% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 14 nm
This processor is built on the Intel 14 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 55.9% of processors and equal to that of 29% of processors.
L3 cache
19.25 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 19.25 MB which is larger than that of 77.6% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
L2 cache
14 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 14 MB which is larger than that of 86.1% of processors and equal to that of 2.3% of processors.
L1 cache
896 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 896 KB which is larger than that of 82.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.7% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 25.2% of processors and equal to that of 31.1% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
2,933 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 2,933 MHz, which is lower than that of 50.3% of processors and equal to 5.1% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-2933 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR4-2933 MHz, which is lower than that of 54% of processors and equal to 4.5% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
4,000 MHz
This processor supports XMP/EXPO memory speeds up to 4,000 MHz, which is higher than that of 93.5% of processors.
Maximum memory capacity
256 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 256 GB of memory, which is more than 89% of processors and equal to 8.8% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
no
This processor does not include integrated graphics. 85.4% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
N/A
Integrated GPU execution units
N/A
Integrated GPU base frequency
N/A
Integrated media encoders/decoders
N/A
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
165 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 165 W which is higher than that of 96.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.9% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
165 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 165 W which is higher than that of 96% of processors and equal to that of 1% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
?
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more

Intel Core i9-10940X vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 2.41x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (27,665 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    27,665 vs 11,469
  • 3.05x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (8,550 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    8,550 vs 2,804.5
  • 8 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (14 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    14 vs 6
  • 10 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (14 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    14 vs 4
  • 2.17x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (11,287 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    11,287 vs 5,209
  • 20 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (28 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    28 vs 8
  • 32 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (48 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    48 vs 16
  • 4.67x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (14 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    14 MB vs 3 MB
  • 10.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.4/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models

    80%

    7.4

    Average grade

    20%

    7.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    1 review, its grade estimated from the review text. 2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.4 vs 6.7
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA2066 vs FP5).
    LGA2066 vs FP5
  • Higher-end processor class
    This processor belongs to a higher-end processor class than the average processor (workstation vs mobile).
    workstation vs mobile
  • 2.41x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (27,665 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    27,665 vs 11,469
  • 3.05x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (8,550 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    8,550 vs 2,804.5
  • 8 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (14 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    14 vs 6
  • 10 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (14 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    14 vs 4
  • 2.17x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (11,287 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    11,287 vs 5,209
  • 20 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (28 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    28 vs 8
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (14x3.3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    14x3.3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 9.1% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.8 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.8 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • More advanced Turbo Core
    This processor has a more advanced Turbo Core version than the average processor (3 vs 2).
    Intel Turbo Boost Max 3
    3 vs 2
  • 4.67x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (14 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    14 MB vs 3 MB
  • 2.33x larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (896 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    896 KB vs 384 KB
  • 2x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 2.14x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (19.3 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    19.25 MB vs 9 MB
  • 32 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (48 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    48 vs 16
  • 4x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (256 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    256 GB vs 64 GB
  • 2x higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (94 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    94 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 14 °C lower CPU temperature
    This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (86 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    86 °C vs 100 °C
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 3.67x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (165 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    165 W vs 45 W
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Cascade Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Cascade Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, TXT, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, TXT, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 3.94x larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (698 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    698 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 16.7% larger process node
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (14 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    14 nm vs 12 nm
  • 14 °C lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (86 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    86 °C vs 100 °C
  • 3.67x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (165 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    165 W vs 45 W
  • 3.52x more expensive
    Intel Core i9-10940X is more expensive than the average processor (£880 vs £250).
    £880 vs £250
  • 4.9% worse value for money
    Intel Core i9-10940X has worse value for money than the average processor (6.94 vs 7.3).
    6.94 vs 7.29
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, TXT, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, TXT, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 54.7% slower classroom rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (154 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    154 vs 340.075
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Cascade Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Cascade Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 3.94x larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (698 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    698 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 16.7% larger process node
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (14 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    14 nm vs 12 nm
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 2 fewer memory channels
    This processor has fewer memory channels than the average processor (4 vs 2). The average processor supports 2 memory channels.
    4 vs 2
  • No integrated graphics
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, while the average processor does. 85.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 3.67x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (165 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    165 W vs 45 W
  • 14 °C lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (86 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    86 °C vs 100 °C
  • 3.67x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (165 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    165 W vs 45 W

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

9.0
Chimera State
≈ estimated
03/09/2020
Personal build · real-world DAW performance tests
Verdict
Intel Core i9-10940X has proven very satisfying for a music production build, with quiet running and headroom to spare.
5.0
eTeknix
≈ estimated
24/11/2019
Benchmark review · overclocking and platform value
Verdict
Intel Core i9-10940X is a refresh of a refresh with little new, and AMD offers better price-performance at the moment.
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

6.0
bit-tech.net
≈ estimated
07/02/2020
Lab test · Workstation processor
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-10940X adds four cores over the 10900X for heavy multi-core work, but early buyers may have to wait for stock.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i9-10940X

  • High multi-threaded performance suitable for rendering, code compilation, and professional software like Adobe Premiere Pro
  • Support for 48 PCIe lanes (72 total platform lanes), making it ideal for workstations using multiple GPUs and NVMe drives
  • Features quad-channel memory support and a high maximum memory capacity of up to 256 GB
  • Unlocked multiplier allows for significant overclocking headroom; some users achieved stable speeds of 4.8 GHz to 5.0 GHz across all 14 cores
  • Lower pricing compared to previous-generation HEDT models and high-end AMD Threadripper alternatives at the time of launch
  • Compatible with existing X299 motherboards, offering a cost-effective upgrade path for users already on that platform

What customers don't like about Intel Core i9-10940X

  • High power consumption, especially when overclocked, with system draws reaching over 500W in some tests
  • Requires high-end cooling solutions (typically 240mm+ AIO or custom loops) to manage extreme heat under load
  • Lags behind mainstream CPUs in single-threaded tasks and gaming performance due to its MESH architecture and lower base clock speeds
  • Poor value proposition compared to AMD's Ryzen 9 3950X or 5000-series, which often outperformed it in many standard benchmarks for less money
  • Lack of modern features like PCIe 4.0 support, which was already being offered by competitors during its release window

Verdict

The Intel Core i9-10940X is a high-end desktop (HEDT) processor from the 10th Gen Cascade Lake-X series, featuring 14 cores and 28 threads with a 3.3 GHz base frequency and a Turbo Boost Max 3.0 speed of up to 4.8 GHz. Built on a 14nm process for the LGA2066 socket, it offers 19.25 MB of Intel Smart Cache, supports quad-channel DDR4-2933 memory up to 256 GB, and provides 48 PCIe 3.0 lanes for extensive expansion. Its primary strengths include excellent multi-threaded performance for content creation tasks like Adobe Premiere Pro, significant overclocking headroom (often reaching 4.9 GHz across all cores), and a robust HEDT platform that balances cost better than higher-core alternatives. However, it is hindered by a high 165W TDP that requires substantial cooling, is based on an aging architecture that struggles to compete with more power-efficient modern mainstream CPUs, and does not include a thermal solution in the box.

Compare Intel Core i9-10940X with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Core i9-10940X and other processors

No results found