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: +52.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+287.9% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 17 MB).
✅Costs $770 less on MSRP ($549 MSRP vs $1,319 MSRP).
✅Delivers 412.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 71.0 vs 13.8 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $1,319 MSRP).
✅Draws 105W instead of 160W, a 55W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3225, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Xeon W-3225

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 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

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 5900X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (11,500 vs 21,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (17 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 13.8 vs 71.0 PassMark/$ ($1,319 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
❌52.4% higher power demand at 160W vs 105W.

Ryzen 9 5900X

2020

Xeon W-3225

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +52.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+287.9% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 17 MB).
✅Costs $770 less on MSRP ($549 MSRP vs $1,319 MSRP).
✅Delivers 412.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 71.0 vs 13.8 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $1,319 MSRP).
✅Draws 105W instead of 160W, a 55W reduction.

Why buy it

✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 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

❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3225, which brings 8 cores / 16 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 9 5900X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (11,500 vs 21,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (17 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 13.8 vs 71.0 PassMark/$ ($1,319 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
❌52.4% higher power demand at 160W vs 105W.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 9 5900X better than Xeon W-3225?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon W-3225 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 gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Ryzen 9 5900X is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 52.9% 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 9 5900X is the better fit. You are getting 82.6% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 12 cores and 24 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 287.9% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 17 MB).

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

Ryzen 9 5900X is the smarter buy today. Ryzen 9 5900X is $770 cheaper on MSRP at $549 MSRP versus $1,319 MSRP, and it gives you a 52.9% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 412.8% better value on MSRP (71.0 vs 13.8 PassMark/$), 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 2019), 287.9% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 17 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 12 cores / 24 threads instead of 8/16. 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 9 5900X Benchmark Check

Xeon W-3225 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Ryzen 9 5900X	Xeon W-3225
1080p
low	323 FPS	211 FPS
medium	291 FPS	166 FPS
high	243 FPS	135 FPS
ultra	193 FPS	102 FPS
1440p
low	307 FPS	173 FPS
medium	248 FPS	134 FPS
high	192 FPS	109 FPS
ultra	157 FPS	82 FPS
4K
low	193 FPS	85 FPS
medium	156 FPS	71 FPS
high	115 FPS	56 FPS
ultra	103 FPS	44 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 5900X Open Xeon W-3225

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Ryzen 9 5900X	Xeon W-3225
1080p
low	772 FPS	380 FPS
medium	647 FPS	314 FPS
high	508 FPS	279 FPS
ultra	450 FPS	247 FPS
1440p
low	619 FPS	342 FPS
medium	536 FPS	292 FPS
high	443 FPS	258 FPS
ultra	364 FPS	222 FPS
4K
low	365 FPS	248 FPS
medium	318 FPS	216 FPS
high	289 FPS	201 FPS
ultra	255 FPS	173 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 5900X Open Xeon W-3225

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Ryzen 9 5900X	Xeon W-3225
1080p
low	832 FPS	456 FPS
medium	645 FPS	456 FPS
high	558 FPS	456 FPS
ultra	459 FPS	456 FPS
1440p
low	721 FPS	456 FPS
medium	565 FPS	456 FPS
high	488 FPS	456 FPS
ultra	407 FPS	456 FPS
4K
low	511 FPS	456 FPS
medium	421 FPS	429 FPS
high	374 FPS	375 FPS
ultra	308 FPS	302 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 5900X Open Xeon W-3225

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Ryzen 9 5900X	Xeon W-3225
1080p
low	974 FPS	456 FPS
medium	974 FPS	456 FPS
high	934 FPS	456 FPS
ultra	826 FPS	456 FPS
1440p
low	959 FPS	456 FPS
medium	843 FPS	456 FPS
high	726 FPS	456 FPS
ultra	617 FPS	456 FPS
4K
low	694 FPS	456 FPS
medium	621 FPS	456 FPS
high	541 FPS	456 FPS
ultra	437 FPS	437 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 5900X Open Xeon W-3225

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Ryzen 9 5900X and Xeon W-3225

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 W-3225

The Xeon W-3225 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 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 GHz. L3 cache: 16.5 MB. L2 cache: 8 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 160 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 18,251 points. Launch price was $1,199.

⚡

Processing Power

The Ryzen 9 5900X packs 12 cores / 24 threads, while the Xeon W-3225 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Ryzen 9 5900X has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the Ryzen 9 5900X versus 4.4 GHz on the Xeon W-3225 — a 8.7% clock advantage for the Ryzen 9 5900X (base: 3.7 GHz vs 3.7 GHz). The Ryzen 9 5900X uses the Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022) architecture (7 nm, 12 nm), while the Xeon W-3225 uses Cascade Lake (2019−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen 9 5900X scores 38,955 against the Xeon W-3225's 18,251 — a 72.4% lead for the Ryzen 9 5900X. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 21,000 vs 11,500 (58.5% advantage for the Ryzen 9 5900X). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,174 vs 1,150, a 61.6% lead for the Ryzen 9 5900X that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 11,888 vs 9,100 (26.6% advantage for the Ryzen 9 5900X). L3 cache: 64 MB on the Ryzen 9 5900X vs 16.5 MB on the Xeon W-3225.

Feature	Ryzen 9 5900X	Xeon W-3225
Cores / Threads	12 / 24+50%	8 / 16
Boost Clock	4.8 GHz+9%	4.4 GHz
Base Clock	3.7 GHz	3.7 GHz
L3 Cache	64 MB+288%	16.5 MB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)	8 MB+1500%
Process	7 nm, 12 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022)	Cascade Lake (2019−2020)
PassMark	38,955+113%	18,251
Cinebench R23 Multi	21,000+83%	11,500
Geekbench 6 Single	2,174+89%	1,150
Geekbench 6 Multi	11,888+31%	9,100

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Ryzen 9 5900X uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon W-3225 uses LGA3647 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-3200 memory speed. The Xeon W-3225 supports up to 1024 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Ryzen 9 5900X) vs 6 (Xeon W-3225). PCIe lanes: 24 (Ryzen 9 5900X) vs 64 (Xeon W-3225) — the Xeon W-3225 offers 40 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: A320,B350,X370,B450,X470,B550,X570 (Ryzen 9 5900X) and C621 (Xeon W-3225).

Feature	Ryzen 9 5900X	Xeon W-3225
Socket	AM4	LGA3647
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 5.0+25%
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

Only the Ryzen 9 5900X has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Xeon W-3225 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: AMD-V (Ryzen 9 5900X) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon W-3225). Primary use case: Ryzen 9 5900X targets Workstation, Xeon W-3225 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Ryzen 9 5900X rivals Core i9-12900K; Xeon W-3225 rivals Ryzen Threadripper 2920X.

Feature	Ryzen 9 5900X	Xeon W-3225
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	—	None
Unlocked	Yes	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	AMD-V	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	Workstation	Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

The Ryzen 9 5900X launched at $549 MSRP, while the Xeon W-3225 debuted at $1319. On MSRP ($549 vs $1319), the Ryzen 9 5900X is $770 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Ryzen 9 5900X delivers 71.0 pts/$ vs 13.8 pts/$ for the Xeon W-3225 — making the Ryzen 9 5900X the 134.7% better value option.