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.

Ryzen 7 3700X

2019

Why buy it

✅+45.5% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 22 MB).
✅Costs $1,870 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $2,199 MSRP).
✅Delivers 382.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 68.2 vs 14.1 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $2,199 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 205W, a 140W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (22,430 vs 31,089).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3245, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Xeon W-3245

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 24.
✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (22 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 14.1 vs 68.2 PassMark/$ ($2,199 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
❌215.4% higher power demand at 205W vs 65W.

Ryzen 7 3700X

2019

Xeon W-3245

2019

Why buy it

✅+45.5% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 22 MB).
✅Costs $1,870 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $2,199 MSRP).
✅Delivers 382.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 68.2 vs 14.1 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $2,199 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 205W, a 140W reduction.

Why buy it

✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 24.
✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (22,430 vs 31,089).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3245, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (22 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 14.1 vs 68.2 PassMark/$ ($2,199 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
❌215.4% higher power demand at 205W vs 65W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon W-3245 better than Ryzen 7 3700X?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon W-3245 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Ryzen 7 3700X is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Xeon W-3245 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 2.9% more average FPS across 40 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon W-3245 is the better fit. You are getting 38.6% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads.

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

Xeon W-3245 is still the faster CPU overall, but Ryzen 7 3700X makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Xeon W-3245 is 568.4% more expensive on MSRP at $2,199 MSRP versus $329 MSRP, and it gives you a 2.9% average FPS lead across 40 shared CPU game tests in our data. Ryzen 7 3700X is also 382.2% better value on MSRP (68.2 vs 14.1 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

Xeon W-3245 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 32 threads instead of 8/16 and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

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.

Ryzen 7 3700X Benchmark Check

Xeon W-3245 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Ryzen 7 3700X	Xeon W-3245
1080p
low	200 FPS	185 FPS
medium	163 FPS	150 FPS
high	137 FPS	123 FPS
ultra	110 FPS	98 FPS
1440p
low	156 FPS	148 FPS
medium	121 FPS	117 FPS
high	100 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	80 FPS	78 FPS
4K
low	84 FPS	82 FPS
medium	71 FPS	70 FPS
high	56 FPS	56 FPS
ultra	44 FPS	44 FPS

Open Ryzen 7 3700X Open Xeon W-3245

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Ryzen 7 3700X	Xeon W-3245
1080p
low	561 FPS	531 FPS
medium	525 FPS	447 FPS
high	428 FPS	372 FPS
ultra	383 FPS	335 FPS
1440p
low	545 FPS	461 FPS
medium	471 FPS	399 FPS
high	394 FPS	336 FPS
ultra	337 FPS	290 FPS
4K
low	350 FPS	287 FPS
medium	304 FPS	248 FPS
high	274 FPS	228 FPS
ultra	242 FPS	199 FPS

Open Ryzen 7 3700X Open Xeon W-3245

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Ryzen 7 3700X	Xeon W-3245
1080p
low	561 FPS	777 FPS
medium	561 FPS	777 FPS
high	561 FPS	777 FPS
ultra	561 FPS	777 FPS
1440p
low	561 FPS	777 FPS
medium	561 FPS	715 FPS
high	538 FPS	677 FPS
ultra	470 FPS	603 FPS
4K
low	499 FPS	524 FPS
medium	394 FPS	428 FPS
high	343 FPS	387 FPS
ultra	275 FPS	314 FPS

Open Ryzen 7 3700X Open Xeon W-3245

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Ryzen 7 3700X	Xeon W-3245
1080p
low	561 FPS	777 FPS
medium	561 FPS	777 FPS
high	561 FPS	777 FPS
ultra	561 FPS	753 FPS
1440p
low	561 FPS	777 FPS
medium	561 FPS	777 FPS
high	561 FPS	696 FPS
ultra	555 FPS	601 FPS
4K
low	561 FPS	646 FPS
medium	501 FPS	566 FPS
high	447 FPS	504 FPS
ultra	396 FPS	437 FPS

Open Ryzen 7 3700X Open Xeon W-3245

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Ryzen 7 3700X and Xeon W-3245

Ryzen 7 3700X

The Ryzen 7 3700X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 July 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 22,430 points. Launch price was $329.

Xeon W-3245

The Xeon W-3245 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 June 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Cascade Lake (2019−2020) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.6 GHz. L3 cache: 22 MB. L2 cache: 16 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 205 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 31,089 points. Launch price was $1,999.

⚡

Processing Power

The Ryzen 7 3700X packs 8 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon W-3245 offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Xeon W-3245 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the Ryzen 7 3700X versus 4.6 GHz on the Xeon W-3245 — a 4.4% clock advantage for the Xeon W-3245 (base: 3.6 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The Ryzen 7 3700X uses the Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) architecture (7 nm, 12 nm), while the Xeon W-3245 uses Cascade Lake (2019−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen 7 3700X scores 22,430 against the Xeon W-3245's 31,089 — a 32.4% lead for the Xeon W-3245. L3 cache: 32 MB on the Ryzen 7 3700X vs 22 MB on the Xeon W-3245.

Feature	Ryzen 7 3700X	Xeon W-3245
Cores / Threads	8 / 16	16 / 32+100%
Boost Clock	4.4 GHz	4.6 GHz+5%
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+12%	3.2 GHz
L3 Cache	32 MB+45%	22 MB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)	16 MB+3100%
Process	7 nm, 12 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)	Cascade Lake (2019−2020)
PassMark	22,430	31,089+39%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	18,000
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,353
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	11,698

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Ryzen 7 3700X uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon W-3245 uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-3200 memory speed. The Xeon W-3245 supports up to 1024 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Ryzen 7 3700X) vs 6 (Xeon W-3245). PCIe lanes: 24 (Ryzen 7 3700X) vs 64 (Xeon W-3245) — the Xeon W-3245 offers 40 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD 500 series,AMD 400 series,AMD 300 series (Ryzen 7 3700X) and C621 (Xeon W-3245).

Feature	Ryzen 7 3700X	Xeon W-3245
Socket	AM4	LGA3647
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0+33%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-3200	DDR4-2933
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	1024 GB+700%
RAM Channels	2	6+200%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	24	64+167%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Ryzen 7 3700X) / VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon W-3245). Primary use case: Xeon W-3245 targets Professional Workstation. Direct competitor: Xeon W-3245 rivals Threadripper 2950X.

Feature	Ryzen 7 3700X	Xeon W-3245
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	Yes
Virtualization	—	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	—	Professional Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

The Ryzen 7 3700X launched at $329 MSRP, while the Xeon W-3245 debuted at $2199. On MSRP ($329 vs $2199), the Ryzen 7 3700X is $1870 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Ryzen 7 3700X delivers 68.2 pts/$ vs 14.1 pts/$ for the Xeon W-3245 — making the Ryzen 7 3700X the 131.3% better value option.