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 9 5900X

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +27.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+28% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 50 MB).
✅Costs $2,153 less on MSRP ($549 MSRP vs $2,702 MSRP).
✅Delivers 694.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 71.0 vs 8.9 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $2,702 MSRP).
✅Draws 105W instead of 200W, a 95W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,888 vs 12,000).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2679 v4, which brings 20 cores / 40 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.

Xeon E5-2679 v4

2016

Why buy it

✅+0.9% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 20 cores / 40 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 24.
✅66.7% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 5900X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (50 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 8.9 vs 71.0 PassMark/$ ($2,702 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
❌90.5% higher power demand at 200W vs 105W.

Ryzen 9 5900X

2020

Xeon E5-2679 v4

2016

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +27.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+28% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 50 MB).
✅Costs $2,153 less on MSRP ($549 MSRP vs $2,702 MSRP).
✅Delivers 694.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 71.0 vs 8.9 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $2,702 MSRP).
✅Draws 105W instead of 200W, a 95W reduction.

Why buy it

✅+0.9% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 20 cores / 40 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 24.
✅66.7% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,888 vs 12,000).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2679 v4, which brings 20 cores / 40 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 5900X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (50 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 8.9 vs 71.0 PassMark/$ ($2,702 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
❌90.5% higher power demand at 200W vs 105W.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 9 5900X better than Xeon E5-2679 v4?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon E5-2679 v4 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Ryzen 9 5900X 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 E5-2679 v4 is the better fit. You are getting 0.9% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 20 cores and 40 threads.

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

Ryzen 9 5900X is the smarter buy today. Ryzen 9 5900X is $2,153 cheaper on MSRP at $549 MSRP versus $2,702 MSRP, and it gives you a 27.5% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Xeon E5-2679 v4 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.9% better Geekbench multi-core. It is also 694.5% better value on MSRP (71.0 vs 8.9 PassMark/$), 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?

Ryzen 9 5900X is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2016) and 28% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 50 MB). 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.

Ryzen 9 5900X Benchmark Check

Xeon E5-2679 v4 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Ryzen 9 5900X	Xeon E5-2679 v4
1080p
low	323 FPS	182 FPS
medium	291 FPS	160 FPS
high	243 FPS	126 FPS
ultra	193 FPS	100 FPS
1440p
low	307 FPS	151 FPS
medium	248 FPS	127 FPS
high	192 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	157 FPS	78 FPS
4K
low	193 FPS	70 FPS
medium	156 FPS	62 FPS
high	115 FPS	48 FPS
ultra	103 FPS	39 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 5900X Open Xeon E5-2679 v4

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Ryzen 9 5900X	Xeon E5-2679 v4
1080p
low	772 FPS	364 FPS
medium	647 FPS	331 FPS
high	508 FPS	279 FPS
ultra	450 FPS	224 FPS
1440p
low	619 FPS	313 FPS
medium	536 FPS	284 FPS
high	443 FPS	242 FPS
ultra	364 FPS	188 FPS
4K
low	365 FPS	195 FPS
medium	318 FPS	178 FPS
high	289 FPS	153 FPS
ultra	255 FPS	120 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 5900X Open Xeon E5-2679 v4

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Ryzen 9 5900X	Xeon E5-2679 v4
1080p
low	832 FPS	603 FPS
medium	645 FPS	603 FPS
high	558 FPS	603 FPS
ultra	459 FPS	603 FPS
1440p
low	721 FPS	603 FPS
medium	565 FPS	590 FPS
high	488 FPS	559 FPS
ultra	407 FPS	505 FPS
4K
low	511 FPS	447 FPS
medium	421 FPS	363 FPS
high	374 FPS	328 FPS
ultra	308 FPS	274 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 5900X Open Xeon E5-2679 v4

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Ryzen 9 5900X	Xeon E5-2679 v4
1080p
low	974 FPS	603 FPS
medium	974 FPS	603 FPS
high	934 FPS	603 FPS
ultra	826 FPS	585 FPS
1440p
low	959 FPS	603 FPS
medium	843 FPS	603 FPS
high	726 FPS	545 FPS
ultra	617 FPS	462 FPS
4K
low	694 FPS	527 FPS
medium	621 FPS	472 FPS
high	541 FPS	418 FPS
ultra	437 FPS	359 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 5900X Open Xeon E5-2679 v4

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Ryzen 9 5900X and Xeon E5-2679 v4

Ryzen 9 5900X

The Ryzen 9 5900X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 5 November 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 38,955 points. Launch price was $549.

Xeon E5-2679 v4

The Xeon E5-2679 v4 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture. It features 20 cores and 40 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 50 MB. L2 cache: 5 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011-3. Thermal design power (TDP): 200 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 24,131 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Ryzen 9 5900X packs 12 cores / 24 threads, while the Xeon E5-2679 v4 offers 20 cores / 40 threads — the Xeon E5-2679 v4 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the Ryzen 9 5900X versus 3.3 GHz on the Xeon E5-2679 v4 — a 37% clock advantage for the Ryzen 9 5900X (base: 3.7 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The Ryzen 9 5900X uses the Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022) architecture (7 nm, 12 nm), while the Xeon E5-2679 v4 uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen 9 5900X scores 38,955 against the Xeon E5-2679 v4's 24,131 — a 47% lead for the Ryzen 9 5900X. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,174 vs 1,000, a 74% lead for the Ryzen 9 5900X that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,888 vs 12,000 (0.9% advantage for the Xeon E5-2679 v4). L3 cache: 64 MB on the Ryzen 9 5900X vs 50 MB on the Xeon E5-2679 v4.

Feature	Ryzen 9 5900X	Xeon E5-2679 v4
Cores / Threads	12 / 24	20 / 40+67%
Boost Clock	4.8 GHz+45%	3.3 GHz
Base Clock	3.7 GHz+48%	2.5 GHz
L3 Cache	64 MB+28%	50 MB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)	5 MB+900%
Process	7 nm, 12 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022)	Broadwell (2015−2019)
PassMark	38,955+61%	24,131
Cinebench R23 Multi	21,000	—
Geekbench 6 Single	2,174+117%	1,000
Geekbench 6 Multi	11,888	12,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Ryzen 9 5900X uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon E5-2679 v4 uses LGA2011-3 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-3200 memory speed. The Xeon E5-2679 v4 supports up to 1536 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 169.2% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Ryzen 9 5900X) vs 4 (Xeon E5-2679 v4). PCIe lanes: 24 (Ryzen 9 5900X) vs 40 (Xeon E5-2679 v4) — the Xeon E5-2679 v4 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: A320,B350,X370,B450,X470,B550,X570 (Ryzen 9 5900X) and C612,X99 (Xeon E5-2679 v4).

Feature	Ryzen 9 5900X	Xeon E5-2679 v4
Socket	AM4	LGA2011-3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0+33%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-3200	DDR4-2400
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	1536 GB+1100%
RAM Channels	2	4+100%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	24	40+67%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: AMD-V (Ryzen 9 5900X) vs Yes (Xeon E5-2679 v4). Primary use case: Ryzen 9 5900X targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Ryzen 9 5900X rivals Core i9-12900K.

Feature	Ryzen 9 5900X	Xeon E5-2679 v4
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	Yes	—
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V	Yes
Target Use	Workstation	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Ryzen 9 5900X launched at $549 MSRP, while the Xeon E5-2679 v4 debuted at $2702. On MSRP ($549 vs $2702), the Ryzen 9 5900X is $2153 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Ryzen 9 5900X delivers 71.0 pts/$ vs 8.9 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2679 v4 — making the Ryzen 9 5900X the 155.3% better value option.