
Core Ultra 7 255HX
Popular choices:

Ryzen 9 5900X
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
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 7 255HX
2025Why buy it
- ✅+42% higher Geekbench multi-core.
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 105W, a 50W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FCBGA2114 with DDR5 support instead of AM4 and DDR4.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc Xe-LPG, while Ryzen 9 5900X needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 5900X across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (30 MB vs 64 MB).
Ryzen 9 5900X
2020Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +12.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+113.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 30 MB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,888 vs 16,885).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $549 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 255HX mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌90.9% higher power demand at 105W vs 55W.
- ❌Older platform position on AM4 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 7 255HX moves to FCBGA2114 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 255HX can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core Ultra 7 255HX
2025Ryzen 9 5900X
2020Why buy it
- ✅+42% higher Geekbench multi-core.
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 105W, a 50W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FCBGA2114 with DDR5 support instead of AM4 and DDR4.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc Xe-LPG, while Ryzen 9 5900X needs a discrete GPU.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +12.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+113.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 30 MB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 5900X across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (30 MB vs 64 MB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (11,888 vs 16,885).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $549 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 255HX mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌90.9% higher power demand at 105W vs 55W.
- ❌Older platform position on AM4 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 7 255HX moves to FCBGA2114 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 255HX can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is Core Ultra 7 255HX better than Ryzen 9 5900X?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core Ultra 7 255HX | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 323 FPS |
| medium | 272 FPS | 291 FPS |
| high | 228 FPS | 243 FPS |
| ultra | 191 FPS | 193 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 225 FPS | 307 FPS |
| medium | 193 FPS | 248 FPS |
| high | 156 FPS | 192 FPS |
| ultra | 135 FPS | 157 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 151 FPS | 193 FPS |
| medium | 129 FPS | 156 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 115 FPS |
| ultra | 87 FPS | 103 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core Ultra 7 255HX | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 673 FPS | 772 FPS |
| medium | 574 FPS | 647 FPS |
| high | 483 FPS | 508 FPS |
| ultra | 438 FPS | 450 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 584 FPS | 619 FPS |
| medium | 515 FPS | 536 FPS |
| high | 434 FPS | 443 FPS |
| ultra | 370 FPS | 364 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 345 FPS | 365 FPS |
| medium | 310 FPS | 318 FPS |
| high | 292 FPS | 289 FPS |
| ultra | 254 FPS | 255 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core Ultra 7 255HX | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 839 FPS | 832 FPS |
| medium | 685 FPS | 645 FPS |
| high | 610 FPS | 558 FPS |
| ultra | 522 FPS | 459 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 727 FPS | 721 FPS |
| medium | 596 FPS | 565 FPS |
| high | 519 FPS | 488 FPS |
| ultra | 441 FPS | 407 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 515 FPS | 511 FPS |
| medium | 434 FPS | 421 FPS |
| high | 394 FPS | 374 FPS |
| ultra | 336 FPS | 308 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core Ultra 7 255HX | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 995 FPS | 974 FPS |
| medium | 901 FPS | 974 FPS |
| high | 782 FPS | 934 FPS |
| ultra | 709 FPS | 826 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 814 FPS | 959 FPS |
| medium | 724 FPS | 843 FPS |
| high | 627 FPS | 726 FPS |
| ultra | 555 FPS | 617 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 555 FPS | 694 FPS |
| medium | 501 FPS | 621 FPS |
| high | 449 FPS | 541 FPS |
| ultra | 396 FPS | 437 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core Ultra 7 255HX and Ryzen 9 5900X

Core Ultra 7 255HX
Core Ultra 7 255HX
The Core Ultra 7 255HX is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2025-01-01. It is based on the Arrow Lake-HX (2025) architecture. It features 20 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 5.2 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2114. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 49,765 points. Launch price was $450.


Ryzen 9 5900X
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.
Processing Power
The Core Ultra 7 255HX packs 20 cores / 20 threads, while the Ryzen 9 5900X offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the Core Ultra 7 255HX has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.2 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 255HX versus 4.8 GHz on the Ryzen 9 5900X — a 8% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 7 255HX (base: 2.4 GHz vs 3.7 GHz). The Core Ultra 7 255HX uses the Arrow Lake-HX (2025) architecture (3 nm), while the Ryzen 9 5900X uses Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022) (7 nm, 12 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 7 255HX scores 49,765 against the Ryzen 9 5900X's 38,955 — a 24.4% lead for the Core Ultra 7 255HX. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,923 vs 2,174, a 29.4% lead for the Core Ultra 7 255HX that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 16,885 vs 11,888 (34.7% advantage for the Core Ultra 7 255HX). L3 cache: 30 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 7 255HX vs 64 MB on the Ryzen 9 5900X.
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 255HX | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 20 / 20+67% | 12 / 24 |
| Boost Clock | 5.2 GHz+8% | 4.8 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.4 GHz | 3.7 GHz+54% |
| L3 Cache | 30 MB (total) | 64 MB+113% |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB (per core)+500% | 512K (per core) |
| Process | 3 nm-57% | 7 nm, 12 nm |
| Architecture | Arrow Lake-HX (2025) | Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022) |
| PassMark | 49,765+28% | 38,955 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 21,000 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,923+34% | 2,174 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 16,885+42% | 11,888 |
Memory & Platform
The Core Ultra 7 255HX uses the FCBGA2114 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen 9 5900X uses AM4 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6400 on the Core Ultra 7 255HX versus DDR4-3200 on the Ryzen 9 5900X — the Core Ultra 7 255HX supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core Ultra 7 255HX supports up to 192 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 40% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 24 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: Intel HM870,Intel WM880 (Core Ultra 7 255HX) and A320,B350,X370,B450,X470,B550,X570 (Ryzen 9 5900X).
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 255HX | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA2114 | AM4 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-6400+25% | DDR4-3200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB+50% | 128 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 24 | 24 |
Advanced Features
Both processors feature an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Core Ultra 7 255HX) vs AMD-V (Ryzen 9 5900X). The Core Ultra 7 255HX includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc Xe-LPG), while the Ryzen 9 5900X requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Ryzen 9 5900X targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 7 255HX rivals Ryzen 9 9850HX; Ryzen 9 5900X rivals Core i9-12900K.
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 255HX | Ryzen 9 5900X |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Intel Arc Xe-LPG | — |
| Unlocked | Yes | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | true | AMD-V |
| Target Use | — | Workstation |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












