
Ryzen 5 3600
Popular choices:

Xeon Phi 7290
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.
Ryzen 5 3600
2019Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +14.9% higher average FPS across 15 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 245W, a 180W reduction.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon Phi 7290.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (17,685 vs 17,839).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon Phi 7290, which brings 72 cores / 288 threads.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $199 MSRP, while Xeon Phi 7290 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Xeon Phi 7290
2016Why buy it
- ✅+0.9% higher PassMark.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 72 cores / 288 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 5 3600 across 15 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌276.9% higher power demand at 245W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Ryzen 5 3600.
Ryzen 5 3600
2019Xeon Phi 7290
2016Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +14.9% higher average FPS across 15 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 245W, a 180W reduction.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon Phi 7290.
Why buy it
- ✅+0.9% higher PassMark.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 72 cores / 288 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (17,685 vs 17,839).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon Phi 7290, which brings 72 cores / 288 threads.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $199 MSRP, while Xeon Phi 7290 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 5 3600 across 15 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌276.9% higher power demand at 245W vs 65W.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Ryzen 5 3600.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen 5 3600 better than Xeon Phi 7290?
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 | Ryzen 5 3600 | Xeon Phi 7290 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 200 FPS | 177 FPS |
| medium | 161 FPS | 143 FPS |
| high | 135 FPS | 113 FPS |
| ultra | 106 FPS | 88 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 154 FPS | 141 FPS |
| medium | 119 FPS | 111 FPS |
| high | 96 FPS | 87 FPS |
| ultra | 75 FPS | 68 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 70 FPS | 66 FPS |
| medium | 58 FPS | 56 FPS |
| high | 46 FPS | 43 FPS |
| ultra | 36 FPS | 34 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Ryzen 5 3600 | Xeon Phi 7290 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 442 FPS | 136 FPS |
| medium | 404 FPS | 120 FPS |
| high | 332 FPS | 109 FPS |
| ultra | 295 FPS | 86 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 420 FPS | 120 FPS |
| medium | 359 FPS | 108 FPS |
| high | 303 FPS | 97 FPS |
| ultra | 263 FPS | 77 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 297 FPS | 87 FPS |
| medium | 259 FPS | 81 FPS |
| high | 230 FPS | 72 FPS |
| ultra | 201 FPS | 56 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Ryzen 5 3600 | Xeon Phi 7290 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 442 FPS | 446 FPS |
| medium | 442 FPS | 446 FPS |
| high | 442 FPS | 446 FPS |
| ultra | 442 FPS | 446 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 442 FPS | 446 FPS |
| medium | 442 FPS | 434 FPS |
| high | 442 FPS | 374 FPS |
| ultra | 432 FPS | 326 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 442 FPS | 394 FPS |
| medium | 361 FPS | 306 FPS |
| high | 305 FPS | 259 FPS |
| ultra | 242 FPS | 209 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Ryzen 5 3600 | Xeon Phi 7290 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 442 FPS | 446 FPS |
| medium | 442 FPS | 446 FPS |
| high | 442 FPS | 446 FPS |
| ultra | 442 FPS | 446 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 442 FPS | 446 FPS |
| medium | 442 FPS | 446 FPS |
| high | 442 FPS | 446 FPS |
| ultra | 442 FPS | 420 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 442 FPS | 446 FPS |
| medium | 442 FPS | 405 FPS |
| high | 413 FPS | 361 FPS |
| ultra | 357 FPS | 310 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Ryzen 5 3600 and Xeon Phi 7290


Ryzen 5 3600
Ryzen 5 3600
The Ryzen 5 3600 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 July 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Matisse (2019−2020) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 17,685 points. Launch price was $199.

Xeon Phi 7290
Xeon Phi 7290
The Xeon Phi 7290 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Knights Landing (2016) architecture. It features 72 cores and 288 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 1.7 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 245 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 17,839 points. Launch price was $800.
Processing Power
The Ryzen 5 3600 packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Xeon Phi 7290 offers 72 cores / 288 threads — the Xeon Phi 7290 has 66 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.2 GHz on the Ryzen 5 3600 versus 1.7 GHz on the Xeon Phi 7290 — a 84.7% clock advantage for the Ryzen 5 3600 (base: 3.6 GHz vs 1.5 GHz). The Ryzen 5 3600 uses the Matisse (2019−2020) architecture (7 nm, 12 nm), while the Xeon Phi 7290 uses Knights Landing (2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen 5 3600 scores 17,685 against the Xeon Phi 7290's 17,839 — a 0.9% lead for the Xeon Phi 7290. L3 cache: 32 MB (total) on the Ryzen 5 3600 vs 0 kB (total) on the Xeon Phi 7290.
| Feature | Ryzen 5 3600 | Xeon Phi 7290 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 72 / 288+1100% |
| Boost Clock | 4.2 GHz+147% | 1.7 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.6 GHz+140% | 1.5 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 32 MB (total) | 0 kB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 512K (per core) | 512 kB (per core) |
| Process | 7 nm, 12 nm-50% | 14 nm |
| Architecture | Matisse (2019−2020) | Knights Landing (2016) |
| PassMark | 17,685 | 17,839 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 9,500 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,295 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 1,898 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Ryzen 5 3600 uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon Phi 7290 uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Ryzen 5 3600 | Xeon Phi 7290 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM4 | LGA3647 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 4.0+33% | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-3200 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 24 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: Yes (Ryzen 5 3600) / not specified (Xeon Phi 7290). Primary use case: Ryzen 5 3600 targets Gaming/Budget Workstation. Direct competitor: Ryzen 5 3600 rivals Core i5-10400.
| Feature | Ryzen 5 3600 | Xeon Phi 7290 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | — |
| Unlocked | Yes | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | Yes | — |
| Target Use | Gaming/Budget Workstation | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












