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 i9-10900K

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +37.8% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Ryzen 7 3700X needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (22,382 vs 22,430).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 44.9 vs 68.2 PassMark/$ ($499 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
❌92.3% higher power demand at 125W vs 65W.

Ryzen 7 3700X

2019

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.
✅+60% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Costs $170 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
✅Delivers 52.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 68.2 vs 44.9 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 125W, a 60W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-10900K across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i9-10900K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i9-10900K

2020

Ryzen 7 3700X

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +37.8% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Ryzen 7 3700X needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.
✅+60% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Costs $170 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
✅Delivers 52.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 68.2 vs 44.9 PassMark/$ ($329 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 125W, a 60W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (22,382 vs 22,430).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 44.9 vs 68.2 PassMark/$ ($499 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
❌92.3% higher power demand at 125W vs 65W.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-10900K across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i9-10900K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 7 3700X better than Core i9-10900K?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Core i9-10900K is ahead with a 37.8% average FPS lead across 2 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen 7 3700X pulls ahead with 0.2% better PassMark. Ryzen 7 3700X also has the bigger cache pool with 60% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 20 MB).

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen 7 3700X is the better fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 60% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 20 MB).

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

Ryzen 7 3700X is the smarter buy today. Ryzen 7 3700X is $170 cheaper on MSRP at $329 MSRP versus $499 MSRP, and it gives you 0.2% better PassMark. The trade-off is that Core i9-10900K is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 37.8% average FPS lead across 2 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 52.0% better value on MSRP (68.2 vs 44.9 PassMark/$), 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 LGA1200 + DDR4 setup, Core i9-10900K 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 i9-10900K is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2019). That makes it the safer long-term pick.

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 i9-10900K Benchmark Check

Ryzen 7 3700X Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i9-10900K	Ryzen 7 3700X
1080p
low	263 FPS	200 FPS
medium	242 FPS	163 FPS
high	202 FPS	137 FPS
ultra	174 FPS	110 FPS
1440p
low	227 FPS	156 FPS
medium	189 FPS	121 FPS
high	154 FPS	100 FPS
ultra	136 FPS	80 FPS
4K
low	157 FPS	84 FPS
medium	131 FPS	71 FPS
high	102 FPS	56 FPS
ultra	89 FPS	44 FPS

Open Core i9-10900K Open Ryzen 7 3700X

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i9-10900K	Ryzen 7 3700X
1080p
low	560 FPS	561 FPS
medium	487 FPS	525 FPS
high	411 FPS	428 FPS
ultra	375 FPS	383 FPS
1440p
low	497 FPS	545 FPS
medium	436 FPS	471 FPS
high	369 FPS	394 FPS
ultra	321 FPS	337 FPS
4K
low	291 FPS	350 FPS
medium	259 FPS	304 FPS
high	247 FPS	274 FPS
ultra	215 FPS	242 FPS

Open Core i9-10900K Open Ryzen 7 3700X

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i9-10900K	Ryzen 7 3700X
1080p
low	560 FPS	561 FPS
medium	560 FPS	561 FPS
high	517 FPS	561 FPS
ultra	426 FPS	561 FPS
1440p
low	560 FPS	561 FPS
medium	546 FPS	561 FPS
high	464 FPS	538 FPS
ultra	387 FPS	470 FPS
4K
low	473 FPS	499 FPS
medium	407 FPS	394 FPS
high	363 FPS	343 FPS
ultra	299 FPS	275 FPS

Open Core i9-10900K Open Ryzen 7 3700X

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i9-10900K	Ryzen 7 3700X
1080p
low	560 FPS	561 FPS
medium	560 FPS	561 FPS
high	560 FPS	561 FPS
ultra	560 FPS	561 FPS
1440p
low	560 FPS	561 FPS
medium	560 FPS	561 FPS
high	560 FPS	561 FPS
ultra	540 FPS	555 FPS
4K
low	539 FPS	561 FPS
medium	490 FPS	501 FPS
high	438 FPS	447 FPS
ultra	383 FPS	396 FPS

Open Core i9-10900K Open Ryzen 7 3700X

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i9-10900K and Ryzen 7 3700X

Core i9-10900K

The Core i9-10900K is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 April 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture. It features 10 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 5.2 GHz. L3 cache: 20 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 22,382 points. Launch price was $488.

Ryzen 7 3700X

The Ryzen 7 3700X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 July 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 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 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 22,430 points. Launch price was $329.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i9-10900K packs 10 cores / 20 threads, while the Ryzen 7 3700X offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Core i9-10900K has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.2 GHz on the Core i9-10900K versus 4.4 GHz on the Ryzen 7 3700X — a 16.7% clock advantage for the Core i9-10900K (base: 3.7 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The Core i9-10900K uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen 7 3700X uses Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) (7 nm, 12 nm). In PassMark, the Core i9-10900K scores 22,382 against the Ryzen 7 3700X's 22,430 — a 0.2% lead for the Ryzen 7 3700X. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core i9-10900K vs 32 MB on the Ryzen 7 3700X.

Feature	Core i9-10900K	Ryzen 7 3700X
Cores / Threads	10 / 20+25%	8 / 16
Boost Clock	5.2 GHz+18%	4.4 GHz
Base Clock	3.7 GHz+3%	3.6 GHz
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	32 MB+60%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	512K (per core)+100%
Process	14 nm	7 nm, 12 nm-50%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)
PassMark	22,382	22,430

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i9-10900K uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Ryzen 7 3700X uses AM4 (PCIe 4.0) — 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 i9-10900K) vs 24 (Ryzen 7 3700X) — the Ryzen 7 3700X offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel 400 series (Core i9-10900K) and AMD 500 series,AMD 400 series,AMD 300 series (Ryzen 7 3700X).

Feature	Core i9-10900K	Ryzen 7 3700X
Socket	LGA1200	AM4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2933	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	128 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	24+50%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i9-10900K) / not specified (Ryzen 7 3700X). The Core i9-10900K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the Ryzen 7 3700X requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i9-10900K targets Desktop.

Feature	Core i9-10900K	Ryzen 7 3700X
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	UHD Graphics 630	—
Unlocked	Yes	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	—
Target Use	Desktop	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i9-10900K launched at $499 MSRP, while the Ryzen 7 3700X debuted at $329. On MSRP ($499 vs $329), the Ryzen 7 3700X is $170 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i9-10900K delivers 44.9 pts/$ vs 68.2 pts/$ for the Ryzen 7 3700X — making the Ryzen 7 3700X the 41.3% better value option.