Ryzen 9 6900HX vs Xeon E5-2679 v4

Ryzen 9 6900HX vs Xeon E5-2679 v4 Performance Spectrum

Ryzen 9 6900HX

8 / 16

24,248

+0.5%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX

Ryzen Threadripper 9960X

Xeon E5-2679 v4

20 / 40

24,131

0.0%

About PassMark

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.

Ryzen 9 6900HX vs Xeon E5-2679 v4 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Ryzen 9 6900HX vs Xeon E5-2679 v4: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Ryzen 9 6900HX

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +8.4% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 45W instead of 200W, a 155W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FP7 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011-3 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 50 MB).
❌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

✅+212.5% larger total L3 cache (50 MB vs 16 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 20 cores / 40 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 0.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 6900HX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (24,131 vs 24,248).
❌Launch MSRP is still $2,702 MSRP, while Ryzen 9 6900HX mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌344.4% higher power demand at 200W vs 45W.
❌Older platform position on LGA2011-3 with DDR4, while Ryzen 9 6900HX moves to FP7 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 9 6900HX better than Xeon E5-2679 v4?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-2679 v4 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Ryzen 9 6900HX is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Ryzen 9 6900HX is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 8.4% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen 9 6900HX is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.5% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads.

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

Ryzen 9 6900HX is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon E5-2679 v4 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. Ryzen 9 6900HX comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $2,702 MSRP, and it still gives you a 8.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Xeon E5-2679 v4 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (8.9 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

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

Ryzen 9 6900HX makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2022 vs 2016), a healthier platform with FP7 and DDR5 instead of LGA2011-3, and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 20/40. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Ryzen 9 6900HX vs Xeon E5-2679 v4 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Ryzen 9 6900HX

The Ryzen 9 6900HX is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Janeiro 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Rembrandt-H (Zen 3+) (2022) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 6 nm process technology. Socket: FP7. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 24,248 points. Launch price was $299.

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 6900HX packs 8 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon E5-2679 v4 offers 20 cores / 40 threads — the Xeon E5-2679 v4 has 12 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Ryzen 9 6900HX versus 3.3 GHz on the Xeon E5-2679 v4 — a 39% clock advantage for the Ryzen 9 6900HX (base: 3.3 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The Ryzen 9 6900HX uses the Rembrandt-H (Zen 3+) (2022) architecture (6 nm), while the Xeon E5-2679 v4 uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen 9 6900HX scores 24,248 against the Xeon E5-2679 v4's 24,131 — a 0.5% lead for the Ryzen 9 6900HX. L3 cache: 16 MB (total) on the Ryzen 9 6900HX vs 50 MB on the Xeon E5-2679 v4.

Feature	Ryzen 9 6900HX	Xeon E5-2679 v4
Cores / Threads	8 / 16	20 / 40+150%
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz+48%	3.3 GHz
Base Clock	3.3 GHz+32%	2.5 GHz
L3 Cache	16 MB (total)	50 MB+213%
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+10140%	5 MB
Process	6 nm-57%	14 nm
Architecture	Rembrandt-H (Zen 3+) (2022)	Broadwell (2015−2019)
PassMark	24,248	24,131
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,000
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	12,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Ryzen 9 6900HX uses the FP7 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon E5-2679 v4 uses LGA2011-3 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Ryzen 9 6900HX	Xeon E5-2679 v4
Socket	FP7	LGA2011-3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0+33%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR4-2400
Max RAM Capacity	—	1536 GB
RAM Channels	—	4
ECC Support	—	Yes
PCIe Lanes	—	40