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 5600X

2020

Why buy it

✅Costs $4,652 less on MSRP ($299 MSRP vs $4,951 MSRP).
✅Delivers 512.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 73.1 vs 11.9 PassMark/$ ($299 MSRP vs $4,951 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 270W, a 205W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3375 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (21,845 vs 59,091).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (32 MB vs 57 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3375, which brings 38 cores / 76 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Xeon W-3375

2021

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +10.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+78.1% larger total L3 cache (57 MB vs 32 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 38 cores / 76 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 24.
✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 11.9 vs 73.1 PassMark/$ ($4,951 MSRP vs $299 MSRP).
❌315.4% higher power demand at 270W vs 65W.

Ryzen 5 5600X

2020

Xeon W-3375

2021

Why buy it

✅Costs $4,652 less on MSRP ($299 MSRP vs $4,951 MSRP).
✅Delivers 512.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 73.1 vs 11.9 PassMark/$ ($299 MSRP vs $4,951 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 270W, a 205W reduction.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +10.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+78.1% larger total L3 cache (57 MB vs 32 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 38 cores / 76 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 24.
✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3375 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (21,845 vs 59,091).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (32 MB vs 57 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3375, which brings 38 cores / 76 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 11.9 vs 73.1 PassMark/$ ($4,951 MSRP vs $299 MSRP).
❌315.4% higher power demand at 270W vs 65W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon W-3375 better than Ryzen 5 5600X?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon W-3375 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Ryzen 5 5600X 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, Xeon W-3375 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 10.2% 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, Xeon W-3375 is the better fit. You are getting 170.5% better PassMark, backed by 38 cores and 76 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 78.1% larger total L3 cache (57 MB vs 32 MB).

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

Xeon W-3375 is still the faster CPU overall, but Ryzen 5 5600X makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Xeon W-3375 is 1555.9% more expensive on MSRP at $4,951 MSRP versus $299 MSRP, and it gives you a 10.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Ryzen 5 5600X is also 512.1% better value on MSRP (73.1 vs 11.9 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

Xeon W-3375 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2021 vs 2020), 78.1% larger total L3 cache (57 MB vs 32 MB), more multi-core headroom with 38 cores / 76 threads instead of 6/12, and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

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.

Ryzen 5 5600X Benchmark Check

Xeon W-3375 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Ryzen 5 5600X	Xeon W-3375
1080p
low	203 FPS	191 FPS
medium	174 FPS	154 FPS
high	140 FPS	126 FPS
ultra	107 FPS	98 FPS
1440p
low	169 FPS	157 FPS
medium	141 FPS	123 FPS
high	113 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	86 FPS	76 FPS
4K
low	85 FPS	72 FPS
medium	76 FPS	60 FPS
high	60 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	47 FPS	39 FPS

Open Ryzen 5 5600X Open Xeon W-3375

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Ryzen 5 5600X	Xeon W-3375
1080p
low	464 FPS	496 FPS
medium	387 FPS	431 FPS
high	324 FPS	345 FPS
ultra	291 FPS	286 FPS
1440p
low	397 FPS	425 FPS
medium	334 FPS	375 FPS
high	290 FPS	310 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	247 FPS
4K
low	263 FPS	264 FPS
medium	226 FPS	237 FPS
high	205 FPS	208 FPS
ultra	171 FPS	174 FPS

Open Ryzen 5 5600X Open Xeon W-3375

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Ryzen 5 5600X	Xeon W-3375
1080p
low	546 FPS	1025 FPS
medium	473 FPS	937 FPS
high	432 FPS	880 FPS
ultra	358 FPS	796 FPS
1440p
low	508 FPS	799 FPS
medium	413 FPS	710 FPS
high	375 FPS	667 FPS
ultra	312 FPS	597 FPS
4K
low	348 FPS	514 FPS
medium	292 FPS	424 FPS
high	255 FPS	372 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	305 FPS

Open Ryzen 5 5600X Open Xeon W-3375

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Ryzen 5 5600X	Xeon W-3375
1080p
low	546 FPS	932 FPS
medium	546 FPS	847 FPS
high	546 FPS	732 FPS
ultra	546 FPS	633 FPS
1440p
low	546 FPS	732 FPS
medium	546 FPS	644 FPS
high	546 FPS	554 FPS
ultra	524 FPS	480 FPS
4K
low	529 FPS	532 FPS
medium	484 FPS	476 FPS
high	435 FPS	419 FPS
ultra	379 FPS	360 FPS

Open Ryzen 5 5600X Open Xeon W-3375

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Ryzen 5 5600X and Xeon W-3375

Ryzen 5 5600X

The Ryzen 5 5600X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 5 November 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Vermeer (Zen 3) (2020−2022) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.6 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 21,845 points. Launch price was $299.

Xeon W-3375

The Xeon W-3375 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2021-07-29. It is based on the Ice Lake-W (2021) architecture. It features 38 cores and 76 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 57 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4189. Thermal design power (TDP): 270 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 59,091 points. Launch price was $4,499.

⚡

Processing Power

The Ryzen 5 5600X packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Xeon W-3375 offers 38 cores / 76 threads — the Xeon W-3375 has 32 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Ryzen 5 5600X versus 4 GHz on the Xeon W-3375 — a 14% clock advantage for the Ryzen 5 5600X (base: 3.7 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The Ryzen 5 5600X uses the Vermeer (Zen 3) (2020−2022) architecture (7 nm, 12 nm), while the Xeon W-3375 uses Ice Lake-W (2021) (10 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen 5 5600X scores 21,845 against the Xeon W-3375's 59,091 — a 92% lead for the Xeon W-3375. L3 cache: 32 MB on the Ryzen 5 5600X vs 57 MB (total) on the Xeon W-3375.

Feature	Ryzen 5 5600X	Xeon W-3375
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	38 / 76+533%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz+15%	4 GHz
Base Clock	3.7 GHz+48%	2.5 GHz
L3 Cache	32 MB	57 MB (total)+78%
L2 Cache	512K (per core)	1 MB (per core)+100%
Process	7 nm, 12 nm-30%	10 nm
Architecture	Vermeer (Zen 3) (2020−2022)	Ice Lake-W (2021)
PassMark	21,845	59,091+171%
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,818
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	17,713

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Ryzen 5 5600X uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon W-3375 uses LGA4189 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-3200 memory speed. The Xeon W-3375 supports up to 4096 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Ryzen 5 5600X) vs 8 (Xeon W-3375). PCIe lanes: 24 (Ryzen 5 5600X) vs 64 (Xeon W-3375) — the Xeon W-3375 offers 40 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD 500 series,AMD 400 series,AMD 300 series (Ryzen 5 5600X) and Intel C621A (Xeon W-3375).

Feature	Ryzen 5 5600X	Xeon W-3375
Socket	AM4	LGA4189
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-3200	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	4096 GB+3100%
RAM Channels	2	8+300%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	24	64+167%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Ryzen 5 5600X has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Xeon W-3375 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: AMD-V (Ryzen 5 5600X) vs true (Xeon W-3375). Primary use case: Ryzen 5 5600X targets Desktop. Direct competitor: Xeon W-3375 rivals EPYC 7543.

Feature	Ryzen 5 5600X	Xeon W-3375
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	—	None
Unlocked	Yes	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	AMD-V	true
Target Use	Desktop	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Ryzen 5 5600X launched at $299 MSRP, while the Xeon W-3375 debuted at $4951. On MSRP ($299 vs $4951), the Ryzen 5 5600X is $4652 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Ryzen 5 5600X delivers 73.1 pts/$ vs 11.9 pts/$ for the Xeon W-3375 — making the Ryzen 5 5600X the 143.8% better value option.