
Ryzen 5 PRO 220
Popular choices:

Ryzen 7 5800X
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 PRO 220
2025Why buy it
- ✅Draws 6W instead of 105W, a 99W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FP7/FP7r2 with DDR5 support instead of AM4 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 5800X across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (19,889 vs 27,712).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 32 MB).
Ryzen 7 5800X
2020Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +11.4% higher average FPS across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 16 MB).
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $449 MSRP, while Ryzen 5 PRO 220 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌1650% higher power demand at 105W vs 6W.
- ❌Older platform position on AM4 with DDR4, while Ryzen 5 PRO 220 moves to FP7/FP7r2 and DDR5.
Ryzen 5 PRO 220
2025Ryzen 7 5800X
2020Why buy it
- ✅Draws 6W instead of 105W, a 99W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FP7/FP7r2 with DDR5 support instead of AM4 and DDR4.
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +11.4% higher average FPS across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+100% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 16 MB).
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 5800X across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (19,889 vs 27,712).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 32 MB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $449 MSRP, while Ryzen 5 PRO 220 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌1650% higher power demand at 105W vs 6W.
- ❌Older platform position on AM4 with DDR4, while Ryzen 5 PRO 220 moves to FP7/FP7r2 and DDR5.
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen 7 5800X better than Ryzen 5 PRO 220?
Which one is better for gaming?
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 PRO 220 | Ryzen 7 5800X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 259 FPS | 206 FPS |
| medium | 237 FPS | 178 FPS |
| high | 199 FPS | 146 FPS |
| ultra | 171 FPS | 110 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 229 FPS | 170 FPS |
| medium | 191 FPS | 142 FPS |
| high | 155 FPS | 115 FPS |
| ultra | 137 FPS | 88 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 159 FPS | 83 FPS |
| medium | 134 FPS | 74 FPS |
| high | 104 FPS | 59 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 46 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Ryzen 5 PRO 220 | Ryzen 7 5800X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 386 FPS | 662 FPS |
| medium | 320 FPS | 558 FPS |
| high | 284 FPS | 466 FPS |
| ultra | 248 FPS | 417 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 324 FPS | 563 FPS |
| medium | 280 FPS | 493 FPS |
| high | 255 FPS | 423 FPS |
| ultra | 218 FPS | 361 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 243 FPS | 350 FPS |
| medium | 214 FPS | 308 FPS |
| high | 201 FPS | 288 FPS |
| ultra | 169 FPS | 250 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Ryzen 5 PRO 220 | Ryzen 7 5800X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 497 FPS | 693 FPS |
| medium | 497 FPS | 651 FPS |
| high | 497 FPS | 570 FPS |
| ultra | 497 FPS | 464 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 497 FPS | 693 FPS |
| medium | 497 FPS | 573 FPS |
| high | 497 FPS | 498 FPS |
| ultra | 430 FPS | 413 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 484 FPS | 484 FPS |
| medium | 425 FPS | 410 FPS |
| high | 362 FPS | 363 FPS |
| ultra | 299 FPS | 302 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Ryzen 5 PRO 220 | Ryzen 7 5800X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 497 FPS | 693 FPS |
| medium | 497 FPS | 693 FPS |
| high | 497 FPS | 693 FPS |
| ultra | 497 FPS | 693 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 497 FPS | 693 FPS |
| medium | 497 FPS | 693 FPS |
| high | 497 FPS | 672 FPS |
| ultra | 497 FPS | 593 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 497 FPS | 604 FPS |
| medium | 497 FPS | 550 FPS |
| high | 441 FPS | 495 FPS |
| ultra | 377 FPS | 436 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Ryzen 5 PRO 220 and Ryzen 7 5800X


Ryzen 5 PRO 220
Ryzen 5 PRO 220
The Ryzen 5 PRO 220 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 6 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Hawk Point-U (Zen 4 + Zen 4c) (2023−2025) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB. L2 cache: 6 MB. Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FP7/FP7r2. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 MB + 16 MB. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 19,889 points. Launch price was $299.


Ryzen 7 5800X
Ryzen 7 5800X
The Ryzen 7 5800X 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 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4.7 GHz. L3 cache: 32 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. Passmark benchmark score: 27,712 points. Launch price was $449.
Processing Power
The Ryzen 5 PRO 220 packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Ryzen 7 5800X offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Ryzen 7 5800X has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Ryzen 5 PRO 220 versus 4.7 GHz on the Ryzen 7 5800X — a 4.2% clock advantage for the Ryzen 5 PRO 220 (base: 3.2 GHz vs 3.8 GHz). The Ryzen 5 PRO 220 uses the Hawk Point-U (Zen 4 + Zen 4c) (2023−2025) architecture (4 nm), while the Ryzen 7 5800X uses Vermeer (Zen 3) (2020−2022) (7 nm, 12 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen 5 PRO 220 scores 19,889 against the Ryzen 7 5800X's 27,712 — a 32.9% lead for the Ryzen 7 5800X. L3 cache: 16 MB on the Ryzen 5 PRO 220 vs 32 MB on the Ryzen 7 5800X.
| Feature | Ryzen 5 PRO 220 | Ryzen 7 5800X |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 6 / 12 | 8 / 16+33% |
| Boost Clock | 4.9 GHz+4% | 4.7 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.2 GHz | 3.8 GHz+19% |
| L3 Cache | 16 MB | 32 MB+100% |
| L2 Cache | 6 MB+1100% | 512K (per core) |
| Process | 4 nm-43% | 7 nm, 12 nm |
| Architecture | Hawk Point-U (Zen 4 + Zen 4c) (2023−2025) | Vermeer (Zen 3) (2020−2022) |
| PassMark | 19,889 | 27,712+39% |
Memory & Platform
The Ryzen 5 PRO 220 uses the FP7/FP7r2 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Ryzen 7 5800X uses AM4 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Ryzen 5 PRO 220 | Ryzen 7 5800X |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FP7/FP7r2 | AM4 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 4.0+33% |
| Max RAM Speed | — | DDR4-3200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | — | 128 GB |
| RAM Channels | — | 2 |
| ECC Support | — | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | — | 24 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Ryzen 5 PRO 220) / AMD-V (Ryzen 7 5800X). Primary use case: Ryzen 7 5800X targets Desktop.
| Feature | Ryzen 5 PRO 220 | Ryzen 7 5800X |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | — | No |
| Unlocked | — | Yes |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | AMD-V |
| Target Use | — | Desktop |
Value Analysis
The Ryzen 5 PRO 220 launched at $0 MSRP, while the Ryzen 7 5800X debuted at $449. On MSRP ($0 vs $449), the Ryzen 5 PRO 220 is $449 cheaper.
| Feature | Ryzen 5 PRO 220 | Ryzen 7 5800X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $0-100% | $449 |
| Performance per Dollar | — | 61.7 |
| Release Date | 2025 | 2020 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.











