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

✅Better for gaming: +4.0% higher average FPS across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+45.5% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 22 MB).
✅Costs $4,673 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $5,002 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1096.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 68.2 vs 5.7 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $5,002 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 205W, a 140W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (22,430 vs 28,494).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3245M, 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-3245M

2019

Why buy it

✅+27% higher PassMark.
✅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.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 3700X across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (22 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 5.7 vs 68.2 PassMark/$ ($5,002 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
❌215.4% higher power demand at 205W vs 65W.

Ryzen 7 3700X

2019

Xeon W-3245M

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.0% higher average FPS across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+45.5% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 22 MB).
✅Costs $4,673 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $5,002 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1096.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 68.2 vs 5.7 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $5,002 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 205W, a 140W reduction.

Why buy it

✅+27% higher PassMark.
✅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.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (22,430 vs 28,494).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3245M, 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

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 3700X across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (22 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 5.7 vs 68.2 PassMark/$ ($5,002 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
❌215.4% higher power demand at 205W vs 65W.

Quick Answers

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

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon W-3245M 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 streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon W-3245M is the better fit. You are getting 27% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads.

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

Ryzen 7 3700X is the smarter buy today. Ryzen 7 3700X is $4,673 cheaper on MSRP at $329 MSRP versus $5,002 MSRP, and it gives you a 4.0% average FPS lead across 49 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Xeon W-3245M is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 27% better PassMark. It is also 1096.8% better value on MSRP (68.2 vs 5.7 PassMark/$), 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?

Xeon W-3245M 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-3245M Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Ryzen 7 3700X	Xeon W-3245M
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-3245M

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Ryzen 7 3700X	Xeon W-3245M
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-3245M

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Ryzen 7 3700X	Xeon W-3245M
1080p
low	561 FPS	712 FPS
medium	561 FPS	712 FPS
high	561 FPS	712 FPS
ultra	561 FPS	712 FPS
1440p
low	561 FPS	712 FPS
medium	561 FPS	712 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-3245M

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Ryzen 7 3700X	Xeon W-3245M
1080p
low	561 FPS	712 FPS
medium	561 FPS	712 FPS
high	561 FPS	712 FPS
ultra	561 FPS	712 FPS
1440p
low	561 FPS	712 FPS
medium	561 FPS	712 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-3245M

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

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

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-3245M

The Xeon W-3245M 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: 28,494 points. Launch price was $5,002.

⚡

Processing Power

The Ryzen 7 3700X packs 8 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon W-3245M offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Xeon W-3245M has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the Ryzen 7 3700X versus 4.6 GHz on the Xeon W-3245M — a 4.4% clock advantage for the Xeon W-3245M (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-3245M uses Cascade Lake (2019−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen 7 3700X scores 22,430 against the Xeon W-3245M's 28,494 — a 23.8% lead for the Xeon W-3245M. L3 cache: 32 MB on the Ryzen 7 3700X vs 22 MB on the Xeon W-3245M.

Feature	Ryzen 7 3700X	Xeon W-3245M
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	28,494+27%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	18,500
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,474
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	11,572

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Ryzen 7 3700X uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon W-3245M uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-3200 memory speed. The Xeon W-3245M supports up to 2048 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 176.5% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Ryzen 7 3700X) vs 6 (Xeon W-3245M). PCIe lanes: 24 (Ryzen 7 3700X) vs 64 (Xeon W-3245M) — the Xeon W-3245M 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-3245M).

Feature	Ryzen 7 3700X	Xeon W-3245M
Socket	AM4	LGA3647
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0+33%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-3200	DDR4-2933
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	2048 GB+1500%
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-3245M). Primary use case: Xeon W-3245M targets Professional Workstation / Mac Pro. Direct competitor: Xeon W-3245M rivals Xeon Gold 6242.

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

💰

Value Analysis

The Ryzen 7 3700X launched at $329 MSRP, while the Xeon W-3245M debuted at $5002. On MSRP ($329 vs $5002), the Ryzen 7 3700X is $4673 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Ryzen 7 3700X delivers 68.2 pts/$ vs 5.7 pts/$ for the Xeon W-3245M — making the Ryzen 7 3700X the 169.2% better value option.