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 i9-9900X

2018

Why buy it

✅+20.3% larger total L3 cache (19 MB vs 16 MB).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (44 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 PRO 250 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (21,655 vs 21,789).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 21.9 vs 54.5 PassMark/$ ($989 MSRP vs $400 MSRP).
❌1962.5% higher power demand at 165W vs 8W.
❌Older platform position on LGA2066 with DDR4, while Ryzen 7 PRO 250 moves to FP8 and DDR5.

Ryzen 7 PRO 250

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +8.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $589 less on MSRP ($400 MSRP vs $989 MSRP).
✅Delivers 148.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 54.5 vs 21.9 PassMark/$ ($400 MSRP vs $989 MSRP).
✅Draws 8W instead of 165W, a 157W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FP8 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2066 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 19 MB).

Core i9-9900X

2018

Ryzen 7 PRO 250

2025

Why buy it

✅+20.3% larger total L3 cache (19 MB vs 16 MB).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (44 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +8.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $589 less on MSRP ($400 MSRP vs $989 MSRP).
✅Delivers 148.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 54.5 vs 21.9 PassMark/$ ($400 MSRP vs $989 MSRP).
✅Draws 8W instead of 165W, a 157W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FP8 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2066 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 7 PRO 250 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (21,655 vs 21,789).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 21.9 vs 54.5 PassMark/$ ($989 MSRP vs $400 MSRP).
❌1962.5% higher power demand at 165W vs 8W.
❌Older platform position on LGA2066 with DDR4, while Ryzen 7 PRO 250 moves to FP8 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 19 MB).

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 7 PRO 250 better than Core i9-9900X?

Yes. Ryzen 7 PRO 250 is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 8.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.6% better PassMark, 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, Ryzen 7 PRO 250 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 8.1% 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, Ryzen 7 PRO 250 is the better fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads.

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

Ryzen 7 PRO 250 is the smarter buy today. Ryzen 7 PRO 250 is $589 cheaper on MSRP at $400 MSRP versus $989 MSRP, and it gives you a 8.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 148.8% better value on MSRP (54.5 vs 21.9 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

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

Ryzen 7 PRO 250 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2018), a healthier platform with FP8 and DDR5 instead of LGA2066, and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 10/20. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

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 i9-9900X Benchmark Check

Ryzen 7 PRO 250 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i9-9900X	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
1080p
low	178 FPS	259 FPS
medium	143 FPS	238 FPS
high	116 FPS	201 FPS
ultra	96 FPS	173 FPS
1440p
low	148 FPS	229 FPS
medium	117 FPS	191 FPS
high	95 FPS	155 FPS
ultra	78 FPS	137 FPS
4K
low	81 FPS	159 FPS
medium	69 FPS	134 FPS
high	55 FPS	104 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	92 FPS

Open Core i9-9900X Open Ryzen 7 PRO 250

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i9-9900X	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
1080p
low	516 FPS	492 FPS
medium	431 FPS	408 FPS
high	360 FPS	356 FPS
ultra	323 FPS	319 FPS
1440p
low	447 FPS	430 FPS
medium	384 FPS	376 FPS
high	323 FPS	328 FPS
ultra	279 FPS	281 FPS
4K
low	278 FPS	284 FPS
medium	239 FPS	259 FPS
high	220 FPS	248 FPS
ultra	192 FPS	214 FPS

Open Core i9-9900X Open Ryzen 7 PRO 250

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i9-9900X	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
1080p
low	541 FPS	545 FPS
medium	541 FPS	545 FPS
high	541 FPS	545 FPS
ultra	527 FPS	522 FPS
1440p
low	541 FPS	545 FPS
medium	518 FPS	545 FPS
high	469 FPS	523 FPS
ultra	407 FPS	449 FPS
4K
low	458 FPS	523 FPS
medium	363 FPS	457 FPS
high	328 FPS	405 FPS
ultra	262 FPS	343 FPS

Open Core i9-9900X Open Ryzen 7 PRO 250

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i9-9900X	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
1080p
low	541 FPS	545 FPS
medium	541 FPS	545 FPS
high	541 FPS	545 FPS
ultra	541 FPS	545 FPS
1440p
low	541 FPS	545 FPS
medium	541 FPS	545 FPS
high	541 FPS	545 FPS
ultra	541 FPS	545 FPS
4K
low	541 FPS	545 FPS
medium	541 FPS	502 FPS
high	506 FPS	449 FPS
ultra	437 FPS	385 FPS

Open Core i9-9900X Open Ryzen 7 PRO 250

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i9-9900X and Ryzen 7 PRO 250

Core i9-9900X

The Core i9-9900X is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 19 October 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (server) (2017−2018) architecture. It features 10 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.5 GHz. L3 cache: 19.25 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2066. Thermal design power (TDP): 165 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 21,655 points. Launch price was $989.

Ryzen 7 PRO 250

The Ryzen 7 PRO 250 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) (2023−2025) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB. L2 cache: 8 MB. Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FP8. Thermal design power (TDP): 8 MB + 16 MB. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 21,789 points. Launch price was $299.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i9-9900X packs 10 cores / 20 threads, while the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Core i9-9900X has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.5 GHz on the Core i9-9900X versus 5.1 GHz on the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 — a 12.5% clock advantage for the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 (base: 3.5 GHz vs 3.3 GHz). The Core i9-9900X uses the Skylake (server) (2017−2018) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 uses Hawk Point-U (Zen 4) (2023−2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i9-9900X scores 21,655 against the Ryzen 7 PRO 250's 21,789 — a 0.6% lead for the Ryzen 7 PRO 250. L3 cache: 19.25 MB (total) on the Core i9-9900X vs 16 MB on the Ryzen 7 PRO 250.

Feature	Core i9-9900X	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
Cores / Threads	10 / 20+25%	8 / 16
Boost Clock	4.5 GHz	5.1 GHz+13%
Base Clock	3.5 GHz+6%	3.3 GHz
L3 Cache	19.25 MB (total)+20%	16 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	8 MB+700%
Process	14 nm	4 nm-71%
Architecture	Skylake (server) (2017−2018)	Hawk Point-U (Zen 4) (2023−2025)
PassMark	21,655	21,789
Cinebench R23 Multi	13,985	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,459	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	9,475	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i9-9900X uses the LGA2066 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 uses FP8 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i9-9900X	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
Socket	LGA2066	FP8
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	—
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	—
RAM Channels	4	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	44	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i9-9900X) / not specified (Ryzen 7 PRO 250).

Feature	Core i9-9900X	Ryzen 7 PRO 250
Integrated GPU	No	—
Unlocked	Yes	—
AVX-512	Yes	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i9-9900X launched at $989 MSRP, while the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 debuted at $400. On MSRP ($989 vs $400), the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 is $589 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i9-9900X delivers 21.9 pts/$ vs 54.5 pts/$ for the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 — making the Ryzen 7 PRO 250 the 85.3% better value option.