
Core Ultra 7 255HX
Popular choices:

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX
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
- ✅+0% higher PassMark.
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 350W, a 295W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc Xe-LPG, while Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (30 MB vs 64 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +9.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+113.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 30 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 24.
- ✅433.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (49,756 vs 49,765).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $1,399 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 255HX mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌536.4% higher power demand at 350W vs 55W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 255HX can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core Ultra 7 255HX
2025Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX
2023Why buy it
- ✅+0% higher PassMark.
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 350W, a 295W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc Xe-LPG, while Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX needs a discrete GPU.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +9.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+113.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 30 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 24.
- ✅433.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (30 MB vs 64 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (49,756 vs 49,765).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $1,399 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 255HX mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌536.4% higher power demand at 350W vs 55W.
- ❌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 Threadripper PRO 7945WX?
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 Threadripper PRO 7945WX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 278 FPS |
| medium | 272 FPS | 253 FPS |
| high | 228 FPS | 216 FPS |
| ultra | 191 FPS | 188 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 225 FPS | 262 FPS |
| medium | 193 FPS | 214 FPS |
| high | 156 FPS | 169 FPS |
| ultra | 135 FPS | 152 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 151 FPS | 180 FPS |
| medium | 129 FPS | 147 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 111 FPS |
| ultra | 87 FPS | 98 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core Ultra 7 255HX | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 673 FPS | 782 FPS |
| medium | 574 FPS | 642 FPS |
| high | 483 FPS | 479 FPS |
| ultra | 438 FPS | 405 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 584 FPS | 643 FPS |
| medium | 515 FPS | 549 FPS |
| high | 434 FPS | 423 FPS |
| ultra | 370 FPS | 330 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 345 FPS | 361 FPS |
| medium | 310 FPS | 312 FPS |
| high | 292 FPS | 274 FPS |
| ultra | 254 FPS | 231 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core Ultra 7 255HX | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 839 FPS | 886 FPS |
| medium | 685 FPS | 704 FPS |
| high | 610 FPS | 622 FPS |
| ultra | 522 FPS | 534 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 727 FPS | 712 FPS |
| medium | 596 FPS | 566 FPS |
| high | 519 FPS | 488 FPS |
| ultra | 441 FPS | 414 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 515 FPS | 507 FPS |
| medium | 434 FPS | 418 FPS |
| high | 394 FPS | 375 FPS |
| ultra | 336 FPS | 315 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core Ultra 7 255HX | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 995 FPS | 1106 FPS |
| medium | 901 FPS | 991 FPS |
| high | 782 FPS | 867 FPS |
| ultra | 709 FPS | 781 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 814 FPS | 860 FPS |
| medium | 724 FPS | 759 FPS |
| high | 627 FPS | 664 FPS |
| ultra | 555 FPS | 576 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 555 FPS | 632 FPS |
| medium | 501 FPS | 562 FPS |
| high | 449 FPS | 496 FPS |
| ultra | 396 FPS | 429 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core Ultra 7 255HX and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX

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 Threadripper PRO 7945WX
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX
The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 19 October 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Storm Peak (2023) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 4.7 GHz, with boost up to 5.3 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: sTR5. Thermal design power (TDP): 350 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 49,756 points. Launch price was $1,399.
Processing Power
The Core Ultra 7 255HX packs 20 cores / 20 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX 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 5.3 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX — a 1.9% clock advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX (base: 2.4 GHz vs 4.7 GHz). The Core Ultra 7 255HX uses the Arrow Lake-HX (2025) architecture (3 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX uses Storm Peak (2023) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 7 255HX scores 49,765 against the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX's 49,756 — a 0% lead for the Core Ultra 7 255HX. L3 cache: 30 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 7 255HX vs 64 MB (total) on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX.
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 255HX | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 20 / 20+67% | 12 / 24 |
| Boost Clock | 5.2 GHz | 5.3 GHz+2% |
| Base Clock | 2.4 GHz | 4.7 GHz+96% |
| L3 Cache | 30 MB (total) | 64 MB (total)+113% |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB (per core)+200% | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | 3 nm-40% | 5 nm |
| Architecture | Arrow Lake-HX (2025) | Storm Peak (2023) |
| PassMark | 49,765 | 49,756 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,923 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 16,885 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Core Ultra 7 255HX uses the FCBGA2114 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX uses sTR5 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6400 on the Core Ultra 7 255HX versus 5200 on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX supports 199.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX supports up to 2048 of RAM compared to 192 GB — 165.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core Ultra 7 255HX) vs 8 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX). PCIe lanes: 24 (Core Ultra 7 255HX) vs 128 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX) — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX offers 104 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel HM870,Intel WM880 (Core Ultra 7 255HX) and WRX90,TRX50 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX).
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 255HX | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA2114 | sTR5 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-6400 | 5200+103900% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB+9830300% | 2048 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 8+300% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 24 | 128+433% |
Advanced Features
Both processors feature an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Only the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: true (Core Ultra 7 255HX) vs VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX). The Core Ultra 7 255HX includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc Xe-LPG), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 7 255HX rivals Ryzen 9 9850HX; Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX rivals Xeon w5-3435X.
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 255HX | Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Intel Arc Xe-LPG | None |
| Unlocked | Yes | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | true | VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












