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 i9-10900T

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +14.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB).
✅Costs $20 less on MSRP ($120 MSRP vs $140 MSRP).
✅Delivers 16.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 122.7 vs 105.5 PassMark/$ ($120 MSRP vs $140 MSRP).
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Ryzen 7 1700.

Ryzen 7 1700

2017

Why buy it

✅50% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-10900T.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-10900T across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (5,000 vs 7,476).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 20 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 105.5 vs 122.7 PassMark/$ ($140 MSRP vs $120 MSRP).
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.

Core i9-10900T

2020

Ryzen 7 1700

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +14.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB).
✅Costs $20 less on MSRP ($120 MSRP vs $140 MSRP).
✅Delivers 16.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 122.7 vs 105.5 PassMark/$ ($120 MSRP vs $140 MSRP).
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.

Why buy it

✅50% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i9-10900T.

Trade-offs

❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Ryzen 7 1700.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-10900T across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (5,000 vs 7,476).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 20 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 105.5 vs 122.7 PassMark/$ ($140 MSRP vs $120 MSRP).
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i9-10900T better than Ryzen 7 1700?

Yes. Core i9-10900T is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 14.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 49.5% better Geekbench multi-core, and the stronger long-term platform, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i9-10900T is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 14.0% 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, Core i9-10900T is the better fit. You are getting 49.5% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 10 cores and 20 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB).

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

Core i9-10900T is the smarter buy today. Core i9-10900T is $20 cheaper on MSRP at $120 MSRP versus $140 MSRP, and it gives you a 14.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 16.3% better value on MSRP (122.7 vs 105.5 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper. That said, if you already own a compatible AM4 + DDR4 setup, Ryzen 7 1700 can still make sense as a platform-matched option because it avoids a motherboard and RAM swap, but on MSRP alone you would want to find it meaningfully cheaper in real-world listings before that path becomes easy to justify.

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

Core i9-10900T is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2017), 25% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 16 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 10 cores / 20 threads instead of 8/16. 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.

Core i9-10900T Benchmark Check

Ryzen 7 1700 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i9-10900T	Ryzen 7 1700
1080p
low	183 FPS	168 FPS
medium	149 FPS	144 FPS
high	122 FPS	117 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	95 FPS
1440p
low	149 FPS	142 FPS
medium	118 FPS	119 FPS
high	96 FPS	94 FPS
ultra	80 FPS	76 FPS
4K
low	83 FPS	64 FPS
medium	72 FPS	58 FPS
high	58 FPS	46 FPS
ultra	45 FPS	36 FPS

Open Core i9-10900T Open Ryzen 7 1700

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i9-10900T	Ryzen 7 1700
1080p
low	290 FPS	277 FPS
medium	242 FPS	245 FPS
high	207 FPS	219 FPS
ultra	186 FPS	180 FPS
1440p
low	250 FPS	244 FPS
medium	215 FPS	221 FPS
high	185 FPS	197 FPS
ultra	159 FPS	162 FPS
4K
low	155 FPS	177 FPS
medium	133 FPS	165 FPS
high	126 FPS	151 FPS
ultra	110 FPS	120 FPS

Open Core i9-10900T Open Ryzen 7 1700

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i9-10900T	Ryzen 7 1700
1080p
low	368 FPS	369 FPS
medium	368 FPS	369 FPS
high	368 FPS	369 FPS
ultra	368 FPS	369 FPS
1440p
low	368 FPS	369 FPS
medium	368 FPS	369 FPS
high	368 FPS	367 FPS
ultra	368 FPS	311 FPS
4K
low	368 FPS	350 FPS
medium	368 FPS	284 FPS
high	340 FPS	258 FPS
ultra	274 FPS	209 FPS

Open Core i9-10900T Open Ryzen 7 1700

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i9-10900T	Ryzen 7 1700
1080p
low	368 FPS	369 FPS
medium	368 FPS	369 FPS
high	368 FPS	369 FPS
ultra	368 FPS	369 FPS
1440p
low	368 FPS	369 FPS
medium	368 FPS	369 FPS
high	368 FPS	369 FPS
ultra	368 FPS	369 FPS
4K
low	368 FPS	369 FPS
medium	368 FPS	369 FPS
high	368 FPS	361 FPS
ultra	368 FPS	311 FPS

Open Core i9-10900T Open Ryzen 7 1700

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i9-10900T and Ryzen 7 1700

Core i9-10900T

The Core i9-10900T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 April 2020 (5 years ago). It features 10 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 4.6 GHz. L3 cache: 20 MB Intel® Smart Cache. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 14,727 points. Launch price was $149.

Ryzen 7 1700

The Ryzen 7 1700 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2 March 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Zen (2017−2020) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 16384 kB. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 14,772 points. Launch price was $329.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i9-10900T packs 10 cores / 20 threads, while the Ryzen 7 1700 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Core i9-10900T has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i9-10900T versus 3.7 GHz on the Ryzen 7 1700 — a 21.7% clock advantage for the Core i9-10900T (base: 1.9 GHz vs 3 GHz). The Ryzen 7 1700 is built on the Zen (2017−2020) architecture. In PassMark, the Core i9-10900T scores 14,727 against the Ryzen 7 1700's 14,772 — a 0.3% lead for the Ryzen 7 1700. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,710 vs 1,000, a 52.4% lead for the Core i9-10900T that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 7,476 vs 5,000 (39.7% advantage for the Core i9-10900T). L3 cache: 20 MB Intel® Smart Cache on the Core i9-10900T vs 16384 kB on the Ryzen 7 1700.

Feature	Core i9-10900T	Ryzen 7 1700
Cores / Threads	10 / 20+25%	8 / 16
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz+24%	3.7 GHz
Base Clock	1.9 GHz	3 GHz+58%
L3 Cache	20 MB Intel® Smart Cache+25%	16384 kB
L2 Cache	—	4096 kB
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	—	Zen (2017−2020)
PassMark	14,727	14,772
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	8,065
Geekbench 6 Single	1,710+71%	1,000
Geekbench 6 Multi	7,476+50%	5,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i9-10900T uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Ryzen 7 1700 uses AM4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-2933 memory speed. Both support up to 128 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i9-10900T) vs 24 (Ryzen 7 1700) — the Ryzen 7 1700 offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Z490,H470,B460,H410,Z590,B560,H510 (Core i9-10900T) and B350,X370,B450,X470,A520,B550,X570 (Ryzen 7 1700).

Feature	Core i9-10900T	Ryzen 7 1700
Socket	LGA1200	AM4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2933	DDR4-2666
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	128 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	24+50%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: Yes (Core i9-10900T) vs AMD-V (Ryzen 7 1700). The Core i9-10900T includes integrated graphics (Intel UHD Graphics 630), while the Ryzen 7 1700 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Ryzen 7 1700 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Ryzen 7 1700 rivals Core i7-7700K.

Feature	Core i9-10900T	Ryzen 7 1700
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Intel UHD Graphics 630	—
Unlocked	—	Yes
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	Yes	AMD-V
Target Use	—	Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i9-10900T launched at $120 MSRP, while the Ryzen 7 1700 debuted at $140. On MSRP ($120 vs $140), the Core i9-10900T is $20 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i9-10900T delivers 122.7 pts/$ vs 105.5 pts/$ for the Ryzen 7 1700 — making the Core i9-10900T the 15.1% better value option.