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

✅Better for gaming: +3.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $164 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
✅Delivers 22.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.4 vs 30.7 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
✅Draws 95W instead of 180W, a 85W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 16,829).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper 1900X, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads.

Ryzen Threadripper 1900X

2017

Why buy it

✅+16.9% higher PassMark.
✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 30.7 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
❌89.5% higher power demand at 180W vs 95W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i7-9700K

2018

Ryzen Threadripper 1900X

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $164 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
✅Delivers 22.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.4 vs 30.7 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
✅Draws 95W instead of 180W, a 85W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅+16.9% higher PassMark.
✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 16,829).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper 1900X, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 30.7 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
❌89.5% higher power demand at 180W vs 95W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-9700K better than Ryzen Threadripper 1900X?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Ryzen Threadripper 1900X makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-9700K is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen Threadripper 1900X is the better fit. You are getting 16.9% 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?

Core i7-9700K is the smarter buy today. Core i7-9700K is $164 cheaper on MSRP at $385 MSRP versus $549 MSRP, and it gives you a 3.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Ryzen Threadripper 1900X is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 16.9% better PassMark. It is also 22.0% better value on MSRP (37.4 vs 30.7 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

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

Core i7-9700K is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2018 vs 2017). That makes it the safer long-term pick.

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 Threadripper 1900X Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
1080p
low	308 FPS	227 FPS
medium	278 FPS	198 FPS
high	231 FPS	163 FPS
ultra	182 FPS	118 FPS
1440p
low	270 FPS	183 FPS
medium	221 FPS	152 FPS
high	178 FPS	120 FPS
ultra	143 FPS	87 FPS
4K
low	170 FPS	71 FPS
medium	140 FPS	63 FPS
high	108 FPS	49 FPS
ultra	95 FPS	39 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Ryzen Threadripper 1900X

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
1080p
low	360 FPS	421 FPS
medium	321 FPS	401 FPS
high	291 FPS	341 FPS
ultra	259 FPS	280 FPS
1440p
low	324 FPS	392 FPS
medium	282 FPS	353 FPS
high	258 FPS	301 FPS
ultra	225 FPS	245 FPS
4K
low	249 FPS	253 FPS
medium	221 FPS	228 FPS
high	208 FPS	206 FPS
ultra	179 FPS	165 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Ryzen Threadripper 1900X

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
1080p
low	360 FPS	421 FPS
medium	360 FPS	421 FPS
high	360 FPS	421 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	421 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	421 FPS
medium	360 FPS	421 FPS
high	360 FPS	421 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	399 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	421 FPS
medium	360 FPS	362 FPS
high	360 FPS	324 FPS
ultra	318 FPS	270 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Ryzen Threadripper 1900X

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
1080p
low	360 FPS	421 FPS
medium	360 FPS	421 FPS
high	360 FPS	421 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	421 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	421 FPS
medium	360 FPS	421 FPS
high	360 FPS	421 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	421 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	421 FPS
medium	360 FPS	421 FPS
high	360 FPS	421 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	371 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Ryzen Threadripper 1900X

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and Ryzen Threadripper 1900X

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 Threadripper 1900X

The Ryzen Threadripper 1900X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 31 August 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Zen (2017−2020) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3r2. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Quad-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 16,829 points. Launch price was $549.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, matching the Ryzen Threadripper 1900X's 8 cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 4 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper 1900X — a 20.2% clock advantage for the Core i7-9700K (base: 3.6 GHz vs 3.8 GHz). The Core i7-9700K uses the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper 1900X uses Zen (2017−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the Ryzen Threadripper 1900X's 16,829 — a 15.6% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper 1900X. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 32 MB on the Ryzen Threadripper 1900X.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
Cores / Threads	8 / 8	8 / 16
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz+23%	4 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz	3.8 GHz+6%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	32 MB+167%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	512K (per core)+100%
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019)	Zen (2017−2020)
PassMark	14,397	16,829+17%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper 1900X uses SP3r2 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
Socket	LGA1151	SP3r2
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	—
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-9700K) / not specified (Ryzen Threadripper 1900X). The Core i7-9700K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the Ryzen Threadripper 1900X requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Ryzen Threadripper 1900X
Integrated GPU	Yes	—
IGPU Model	UHD Graphics 630	—
Unlocked	Yes	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	—
Target Use	Desktop	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i7-9700K launched at $385 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper 1900X debuted at $549. On MSRP ($385 vs $549), the Core i7-9700K is $164 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-9700K delivers 37.4 pts/$ vs 30.7 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper 1900X — making the Core i7-9700K the 19.8% better value option.