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 265F

2025

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,030 less on MSRP ($369 MSRP vs $1,399 MSRP).
✅Delivers 274.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 133.2 vs 35.6 PassMark/$ ($369 MSRP vs $1,399 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 350W, a 285W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (49,161 vs 49,756).
❌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

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +9.2% 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 per dollar, at 35.6 vs 133.2 PassMark/$ ($1,399 MSRP vs $369 MSRP).
❌438.5% higher power demand at 350W vs 65W.

Core Ultra 7 265F

2025

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX

2023

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,030 less on MSRP ($369 MSRP vs $1,399 MSRP).
✅Delivers 274.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 133.2 vs 35.6 PassMark/$ ($369 MSRP vs $1,399 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 350W, a 285W reduction.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +9.2% 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.
❌Lower PassMark (49,161 vs 49,756).
❌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 per dollar, at 35.6 vs 133.2 PassMark/$ ($1,399 MSRP vs $369 MSRP).
❌438.5% higher power demand at 350W vs 65W.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX better than Core Ultra 7 265F?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core Ultra 7 265F 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 Threadripper PRO 7945WX is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 9.2% 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 Threadripper PRO 7945WX is the better fit. You are getting 1.2% better PassMark, backed by 12 cores and 24 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 113.3% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 30 MB).

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

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX is still the faster CPU overall, but Core Ultra 7 265F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX is 279.1% more expensive on MSRP at $1,399 MSRP versus $369 MSRP, and it gives you a 9.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core Ultra 7 265F is also 274.6% better value on MSRP (133.2 vs 35.6 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

Core Ultra 7 265F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2023). 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 7 265F Benchmark Check

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core Ultra 7 265F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX
1080p
low	280 FPS	278 FPS
medium	273 FPS	253 FPS
high	227 FPS	216 FPS
ultra	191 FPS	188 FPS
1440p
low	226 FPS	262 FPS
medium	194 FPS	214 FPS
high	155 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

Open Core Ultra 7 265F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core Ultra 7 265F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX
1080p
low	695 FPS	782 FPS
medium	593 FPS	642 FPS
high	498 FPS	479 FPS
ultra	448 FPS	405 FPS
1440p
low	605 FPS	643 FPS
medium	539 FPS	549 FPS
high	452 FPS	423 FPS
ultra	384 FPS	330 FPS
4K
low	356 FPS	361 FPS
medium	324 FPS	312 FPS
high	305 FPS	274 FPS
ultra	266 FPS	231 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 265F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core Ultra 7 265F	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

Open Core Ultra 7 265F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core Ultra 7 265F	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

Open Core Ultra 7 265F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core Ultra 7 265F and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX

Core Ultra 7 265F

The Core Ultra 7 265F 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 20 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 5.3 GHz. L3 cache: 30 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: 49,161 points. Launch price was $379.

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 265F packs 20 cores / 20 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the Core Ultra 7 265F has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.3 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 265F versus 5.3 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX — identical boost frequencies (base: 2.4 GHz vs 4.7 GHz). The Core Ultra 7 265F uses the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture (3 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX uses Storm Peak (2023) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 7 265F scores 49,161 against the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX's 49,756 — a 1.2% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX. L3 cache: 30 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 7 265F vs 64 MB (total) on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX.

Feature	Core Ultra 7 265F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX
Cores / Threads	20 / 20+67%	12 / 24
Boost Clock	5.3 GHz	5.3 GHz
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-S (2024−2025)	Storm Peak (2023)
PassMark	49,161	49,756+1%
Cinebench R23 Multi	25,459	—
Geekbench 6 Single	3,000	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	20,000	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 7 265F uses the LGA1851 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 265F 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 256 GB — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core Ultra 7 265F) vs 8 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX). PCIe lanes: 24 (Core Ultra 7 265F) vs 128 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX) — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX offers 104 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Z890,B860,H810 (Core Ultra 7 265F) and WRX90,TRX50 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX).

Feature	Core Ultra 7 265F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX
Socket	LGA1851	sTR5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6400	5200+103900%
Max RAM Capacity	256 GB+13107100%	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: VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 7 265F) vs VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX). Primary use case: Core Ultra 7 265F targets High Performance Gaming. Direct competitor: Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX rivals Xeon w5-3435X.

Feature	Core Ultra 7 265F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	None
Unlocked	Yes	Yes
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V
Target Use	High Performance Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core Ultra 7 265F launched at $369 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX debuted at $1399. On MSRP ($369 vs $1399), the Core Ultra 7 265F is $1030 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core Ultra 7 265F delivers 133.2 pts/$ vs 35.6 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX — making the Core Ultra 7 265F the 115.7% better value option.