PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Core i7-9700K

2018

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 31,508).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $385 MSRP, while Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌72.7% higher power demand at 95W vs 55W.

Ryzen AI Max PRO 385

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +69.8% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Draws 55W instead of 95W, a 40W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FP11 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1151 and DDR4.
✅25% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Core i7-9700K

2018

Ryzen AI Max PRO 385

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +69.8% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Draws 55W instead of 95W, a 40W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FP11 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1151 and DDR4.
✅25% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 31,508).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $385 MSRP, while Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌72.7% higher power demand at 95W vs 55W.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 better than Core i7-9700K?

Yes. Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 69.8% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data, 118.9% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 69.8% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is the better fit. You are getting 118.9% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 166.7% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 12 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is the smarter buy by a wide margin for a fresh build. Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $385 MSRP, and it gives you a 69.8% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i7-9700K only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that is mostly used-market pricing on an obsolete 2018 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (37.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a very cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA1151.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2018), a healthier platform with FP11 and DDR5 instead of LGA1151, 166.7% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 12 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 8/8. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core i7-9700K Benchmark Check

Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Ryzen AI Max PRO 385
1080p
low	308 FPS	277 FPS
medium	278 FPS	243 FPS
high	231 FPS	209 FPS
ultra	182 FPS	179 FPS
1440p
low	270 FPS	233 FPS
medium	221 FPS	185 FPS
high	178 FPS	153 FPS
ultra	143 FPS	134 FPS
4K
low	170 FPS	162 FPS
medium	140 FPS	129 FPS
high	108 FPS	100 FPS
ultra	95 FPS	86 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Ryzen AI Max PRO 385

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Ryzen AI Max PRO 385
1080p
low	360 FPS	684 FPS
medium	321 FPS	565 FPS
high	291 FPS	460 FPS
ultra	259 FPS	417 FPS
1440p
low	324 FPS	591 FPS
medium	282 FPS	514 FPS
high	258 FPS	422 FPS
ultra	225 FPS	360 FPS
4K
low	249 FPS	352 FPS
medium	221 FPS	311 FPS
high	208 FPS	286 FPS
ultra	179 FPS	251 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Ryzen AI Max PRO 385

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Ryzen AI Max PRO 385
1080p
low	360 FPS	788 FPS
medium	360 FPS	788 FPS
high	360 FPS	706 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	594 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	788 FPS
medium	360 FPS	644 FPS
high	360 FPS	559 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	472 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	562 FPS
medium	360 FPS	459 FPS
high	360 FPS	408 FPS
ultra	318 FPS	338 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Ryzen AI Max PRO 385

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Ryzen AI Max PRO 385
1080p
low	360 FPS	788 FPS
medium	360 FPS	788 FPS
high	360 FPS	788 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	781 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	788 FPS
medium	360 FPS	768 FPS
high	360 FPS	673 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	590 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	609 FPS
medium	360 FPS	541 FPS
high	360 FPS	486 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	426 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Ryzen AI Max PRO 385

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and Ryzen AI Max PRO 385

Core i7-9700K

The Core i7-9700K is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 19 October 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 14,397 points. Launch price was $374.

Ryzen AI Max PRO 385

The Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 6 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Strix Halo (2025) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FP11. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 31,508 points. Launch price was $499.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, matching the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385's 8 cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 5 GHz on the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 — a 2% clock advantage for the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 (base: 3.6 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The Core i7-9700K uses the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 uses Strix Halo (2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385's 31,508 — a 74.5% lead for the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 32 MB (total) on the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Ryzen AI Max PRO 385
Cores / Threads	8 / 8	8 / 16
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz	5 GHz+2%
Base Clock	3.6 GHz	3.6 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	32 MB (total)+167%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	1 MB (per core)+300%
Process	14 nm	4 nm-71%
Architecture	Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019)	Strix Halo (2025)
PassMark	14,397	31,508+119%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	16,500
Geekbench 6 Single	—	2,886
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	14,136

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 uses FP11 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i7-9700K versus LPDDR5x-8000 on the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 — the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 128 GB of RAM. Memory channels: 2 (Core i7-9700K) vs 8 (Ryzen AI Max PRO 385). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-9700K) vs 20 (Ryzen AI Max PRO 385) — the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel 300 series (Core i7-9700K) and Strix Halo platform (Ryzen AI Max PRO 385).

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Ryzen AI Max PRO 385
Socket	LGA1151	FP11
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	LPDDR5x-8000+25%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	128 GB
RAM Channels	2	8+300%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	20+25%

🔧

Advanced Features

Both processors feature an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Only the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-9700K) vs AMD-V (Ryzen AI Max PRO 385). Both include integrated graphics — UHD Graphics 630 (Core i7-9700K) and Radeon 8050S (Ryzen AI Max PRO 385) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop, Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 targets Enterprise AI Mobile. Direct competitor: Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 rivals M3 Max.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Ryzen AI Max PRO 385
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	UHD Graphics 630	Radeon 8050S
Unlocked	Yes	Yes
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V
Target Use	Desktop	Enterprise AI Mobile