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.

Core Ultra 5 225F

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.9% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $268 less on MSRP ($231 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
✅Delivers 118.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 136.5 vs 62.6 PassMark/$ ($231 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
✅Newer platform on LGA1851 with DDR5 support instead of AM4 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (17,050 vs 17,500).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 64 MB).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Ryzen 9 PRO 3900.

Ryzen 9 PRO 3900

2019

Why buy it

✅+2.6% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
✅+220% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Wraith Prism), unlike Core Ultra 5 225F.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 5 225F across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 62.6 vs 136.5 PassMark/$ ($499 MSRP vs $231 MSRP).
❌Older platform position on AM4 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 5 225F moves to LGA1851 and DDR5.

Core Ultra 5 225F

2025

Ryzen 9 PRO 3900

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.9% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $268 less on MSRP ($231 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
✅Delivers 118.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 136.5 vs 62.6 PassMark/$ ($231 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
✅Newer platform on LGA1851 with DDR5 support instead of AM4 and DDR4.

Why buy it

✅+2.6% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
✅+220% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Wraith Prism), unlike Core Ultra 5 225F.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (17,050 vs 17,500).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 64 MB).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Ryzen 9 PRO 3900.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 5 225F across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 62.6 vs 136.5 PassMark/$ ($499 MSRP vs $231 MSRP).
❌Older platform position on AM4 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 5 225F moves to LGA1851 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 5 225F better than Ryzen 9 PRO 3900?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Core Ultra 5 225F is ahead with a 3.9% average FPS lead across 3 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 pulls ahead with 2.6% better Cinebench R23 multi-core. Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 also has the bigger cache pool with 220% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 20 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 is the better fit. You are getting 2.6% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 12 cores and 24 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 220% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 20 MB).

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

Core Ultra 5 225F is the smarter buy today. Core Ultra 5 225F is $268 cheaper on MSRP at $231 MSRP versus $499 MSRP, and it gives you a 3.9% average FPS lead across 3 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 2.6% better Cinebench R23 multi-core. It is also 118.0% better value on MSRP (136.5 vs 62.6 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper. That said, if you already own a compatible AM4 + DDR4 setup, Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 can still make sense as a platform-matched option because it avoids a motherboard and RAM swap, but on MSRP alone you would want to find it meaningfully cheaper in real-world listings before that path becomes easy to justify.

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

Core Ultra 5 225F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2019) and a healthier platform with LGA1851 and DDR5 instead of AM4. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

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.

Core Ultra 5 225F Benchmark Check

Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core Ultra 5 225F	Ryzen 9 PRO 3900
1080p
low	256 FPS	188 FPS
medium	244 FPS	150 FPS
high	208 FPS	122 FPS
ultra	176 FPS	99 FPS
1440p
low	219 FPS	156 FPS
medium	187 FPS	121 FPS
high	154 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	133 FPS	80 FPS
4K
low	150 FPS	83 FPS
medium	127 FPS	69 FPS
high	99 FPS	54 FPS
ultra	86 FPS	44 FPS

Open Core Ultra 5 225F Open Ryzen 9 PRO 3900

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core Ultra 5 225F	Ryzen 9 PRO 3900
1080p
low	603 FPS	589 FPS
medium	512 FPS	510 FPS
high	421 FPS	414 FPS
ultra	378 FPS	368 FPS
1440p
low	501 FPS	506 FPS
medium	441 FPS	446 FPS
high	372 FPS	374 FPS
ultra	319 FPS	312 FPS
4K
low	301 FPS	317 FPS
medium	266 FPS	283 FPS
high	248 FPS	256 FPS
ultra	218 FPS	229 FPS

Open Core Ultra 5 225F Open Ryzen 9 PRO 3900

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core Ultra 5 225F	Ryzen 9 PRO 3900
1080p
low	789 FPS	781 FPS
medium	680 FPS	690 FPS
high	609 FPS	615 FPS
ultra	522 FPS	539 FPS
1440p
low	725 FPS	664 FPS
medium	588 FPS	540 FPS
high	515 FPS	481 FPS
ultra	439 FPS	419 FPS
4K
low	504 FPS	471 FPS
medium	422 FPS	370 FPS
high	377 FPS	327 FPS
ultra	318 FPS	264 FPS

Open Core Ultra 5 225F Open Ryzen 9 PRO 3900

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core Ultra 5 225F	Ryzen 9 PRO 3900
1080p
low	789 FPS	781 FPS
medium	789 FPS	781 FPS
high	777 FPS	781 FPS
ultra	699 FPS	706 FPS
1440p
low	789 FPS	781 FPS
medium	716 FPS	710 FPS
high	623 FPS	609 FPS
ultra	547 FPS	538 FPS
4K
low	560 FPS	574 FPS
medium	510 FPS	516 FPS
high	457 FPS	452 FPS
ultra	402 FPS	398 FPS

Open Core Ultra 5 225F Open Ryzen 9 PRO 3900

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core Ultra 5 225F and Ryzen 9 PRO 3900

Core Ultra 5 225F

The Core Ultra 5 225F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture. It features 10 cores and 10 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 20 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1851. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 31,541 points. Launch price was $231.

Ryzen 9 PRO 3900

The Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 30 September 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB. L2 cache: 6 MB. Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 31,251 points. Launch price was $499.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 5 225F packs 10 cores / 10 threads, while the Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core Ultra 5 225F versus 4.3 GHz on the Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 — a 13% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 5 225F (base: 3.3 GHz vs 3.1 GHz). The Core Ultra 5 225F uses the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture (3 nm), while the Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 uses Zen 2 (2017−2020) (7 nm, 12 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 5 225F scores 31,541 against the Ryzen 9 PRO 3900's 31,251 — a 0.9% lead for the Core Ultra 5 225F. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 17,050 vs 17,500 (2.6% advantage for the Ryzen 9 PRO 3900). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,653 vs 1,688, a 44.5% lead for the Core Ultra 5 225F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 13,028 vs 10,000 (26.3% advantage for the Core Ultra 5 225F). L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 5 225F vs 64 MB on the Ryzen 9 PRO 3900.

Feature	Core Ultra 5 225F	Ryzen 9 PRO 3900
Cores / Threads	10 / 10	12 / 24+20%
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz+14%	4.3 GHz
Base Clock	3.3 GHz+6%	3.1 GHz
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	64 MB+220%
L2 Cache	3 MB (per core)	6 MB+100%
Process	3 nm-57%	7 nm, 12 nm
Architecture	Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)	Zen 2 (2017−2020)
PassMark	31,541	31,251
Cinebench R23 Multi	17,050	17,500+3%
Geekbench 6 Single	2,653+57%	1,688
Geekbench 6 Multi	13,028+30%	10,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 5 225F uses the LGA1851 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 uses AM4 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6400 on the Core Ultra 5 225F versus DDR4-3200 on the Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 — the Core Ultra 5 225F supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core Ultra 5 225F supports up to 256 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 24 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: Z890,B860 (Core Ultra 5 225F) and X570,B550,X470,B450 (Ryzen 9 PRO 3900).

Feature	Core Ultra 5 225F	Ryzen 9 PRO 3900
Socket	LGA1851	AM4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6400+25%	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	256 GB+100%	128 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	24	24

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Core Ultra 5 225F supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 5 225F) vs AMD-V (Ryzen 9 PRO 3900). Primary use case: Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 targets Professional Content Creation. Direct competitor: Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 rivals Core i9-10900.

Feature	Core Ultra 5 225F	Ryzen 9 PRO 3900
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	Yes	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V
Target Use	—	Professional Content Creation

💰

Value Analysis

The Core Ultra 5 225F launched at $231 MSRP, while the Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 debuted at $499. On MSRP ($231 vs $499), the Core Ultra 5 225F is $268 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core Ultra 5 225F delivers 136.5 pts/$ vs 62.6 pts/$ for the Ryzen 9 PRO 3900 — making the Core Ultra 5 225F the 74.2% better value option.