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 9 3900

2019

Why buy it

✅+172.3% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
✅+70.7% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 38 MB).
✅Draws 65W instead of 155W, a 90W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Wraith Prism), unlike Xeon E7-4890 v2.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E7-4890 v2 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E7-4890 v2, which brings 15 cores / 30 threads and 32 PCIe lanes.
❌Launch MSRP is still $499 MSRP, while Xeon E7-4890 v2 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Xeon E7-4890 v2

2014

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 15 cores / 30 threads, plus 32 PCIe lanes vs 24.
✅33.3% more PCIe lanes (32 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (6,500 vs 17,700).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (38 MB vs 64 MB).
❌138.5% higher power demand at 155W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Ryzen 9 3900.

Ryzen 9 3900

2019

Xeon E7-4890 v2

2014

Why buy it

✅+172.3% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
✅+70.7% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 38 MB).
✅Draws 65W instead of 155W, a 90W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Wraith Prism), unlike Xeon E7-4890 v2.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.9% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 15 cores / 30 threads, plus 32 PCIe lanes vs 24.
✅33.3% more PCIe lanes (32 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E7-4890 v2 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E7-4890 v2, which brings 15 cores / 30 threads and 32 PCIe lanes.
❌Launch MSRP is still $499 MSRP, while Xeon E7-4890 v2 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (6,500 vs 17,700).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (38 MB vs 64 MB).
❌138.5% higher power demand at 155W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Ryzen 9 3900.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 9 3900 better than Xeon E7-4890 v2?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon E7-4890 v2 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Ryzen 9 3900 is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen 9 3900 is the better fit. You are getting 172.3% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 12 cores and 24 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 70.7% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 38 MB).

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

Ryzen 9 3900 is the smarter buy today. Ryzen 9 3900 is at an unclear MSRP at $499 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you 172.3% better Cinebench R23 multi-core. The trade-off is that Xeon E7-4890 v2 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 5.9% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (61.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 9 3900 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2014), 70.7% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 38 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 12 cores / 24 threads instead of 15/30. 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 9 3900 Benchmark Check

Xeon E7-4890 v2 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Ryzen 9 3900	Xeon E7-4890 v2
1080p
low	159 FPS	186 FPS
medium	130 FPS	148 FPS
high	111 FPS	118 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	92 FPS
1440p
low	144 FPS	153 FPS
medium	115 FPS	119 FPS
high	94 FPS	92 FPS
ultra	78 FPS	73 FPS
4K
low	78 FPS	72 FPS
medium	67 FPS	59 FPS
high	53 FPS	46 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	38 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 3900 Open Xeon E7-4890 v2

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Ryzen 9 3900	Xeon E7-4890 v2
1080p
low	534 FPS	368 FPS
medium	470 FPS	324 FPS
high	384 FPS	270 FPS
ultra	342 FPS	216 FPS
1440p
low	460 FPS	318 FPS
medium	411 FPS	282 FPS
high	347 FPS	238 FPS
ultra	289 FPS	184 FPS
4K
low	288 FPS	199 FPS
medium	261 FPS	178 FPS
high	238 FPS	152 FPS
ultra	213 FPS	121 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 3900 Open Xeon E7-4890 v2

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Ryzen 9 3900	Xeon E7-4890 v2
1080p
low	709 FPS	774 FPS
medium	589 FPS	774 FPS
high	536 FPS	763 FPS
ultra	472 FPS	679 FPS
1440p
low	541 FPS	744 FPS
medium	448 FPS	638 FPS
high	401 FPS	605 FPS
ultra	347 FPS	537 FPS
4K
low	394 FPS	479 FPS
medium	315 FPS	376 FPS
high	279 FPS	335 FPS
ultra	224 FPS	274 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 3900 Open Xeon E7-4890 v2

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Ryzen 9 3900	Xeon E7-4890 v2
1080p
low	765 FPS	774 FPS
medium	765 FPS	774 FPS
high	711 FPS	765 FPS
ultra	638 FPS	648 FPS
1440p
low	725 FPS	774 FPS
medium	644 FPS	686 FPS
high	553 FPS	586 FPS
ultra	486 FPS	493 FPS
4K
low	516 FPS	581 FPS
medium	469 FPS	506 FPS
high	411 FPS	442 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	377 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 3900 Open Xeon E7-4890 v2

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Ryzen 9 3900 and Xeon E7-4890 v2

Ryzen 9 3900

The Ryzen 9 3900 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 24 September 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 30,588 points. Launch price was $499.

Xeon E7-4890 v2

The Xeon E7-4890 v2 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It features 15 cores and 30 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 37.5 MB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 155 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333, DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 30,946 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Ryzen 9 3900 packs 12 cores / 24 threads, while the Xeon E7-4890 v2 offers 15 cores / 30 threads — the Xeon E7-4890 v2 has 3 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Ryzen 9 3900 versus 3.4 GHz on the Xeon E7-4890 v2 — a 23.4% clock advantage for the Ryzen 9 3900 (base: 3.1 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The Ryzen 9 3900 is built on the Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) architecture. In PassMark, the Ryzen 9 3900 scores 30,588 against the Xeon E7-4890 v2's 30,946 — a 1.2% lead for the Xeon E7-4890 v2. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 17,700 vs 6,500 (92.6% advantage for the Ryzen 9 3900). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,713 vs 730, a 80.5% lead for the Ryzen 9 3900 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 10,983 vs 5,500 (66.5% advantage for the Ryzen 9 3900). L3 cache: 64 MB on the Ryzen 9 3900 vs 37.5 MB on the Xeon E7-4890 v2.

Feature	Ryzen 9 3900	Xeon E7-4890 v2
Cores / Threads	12 / 24	15 / 30+25%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+26%	3.4 GHz
Base Clock	3.1 GHz+11%	2.8 GHz
L3 Cache	64 MB+71%	37.5 MB
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	—
Process	7 nm, 12 nm-68%	22 nm
Architecture	Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)	—
PassMark	30,588	30,946+1%
Cinebench R23 Multi	17,700+172%	6,500
Geekbench 6 Single	1,713+135%	730
Geekbench 6 Multi	10,983+100%	5,500

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Ryzen 9 3900 uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon E7-4890 v2 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-3200 on the Ryzen 9 3900 versus DDR3-1600 on the Xeon E7-4890 v2 — the Ryzen 9 3900 supports 28.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon E7-4890 v2 supports up to 1536 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 169.2% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Ryzen 9 3900) vs 4 (Xeon E7-4890 v2). PCIe lanes: 24 (Ryzen 9 3900) vs 32 (Xeon E7-4890 v2) — the Xeon E7-4890 v2 offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: X570,B550,X470,B450 (Ryzen 9 3900) and C602 (Xeon E7-4890 v2).

Feature	Ryzen 9 3900	Xeon E7-4890 v2
Socket	AM4	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0+33%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-3200+33%	DDR3-1600
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	1536 GB+1100%
RAM Channels	2	4+100%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	24	32+33%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Ryzen 9 3900 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: AMD-V (Ryzen 9 3900) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon E7-4890 v2). Primary use case: Ryzen 9 3900 targets Workstation Desktop (low power), Xeon E7-4890 v2 targets Enterprise Server (Legacy). Direct competitor: Ryzen 9 3900 rivals Core i9-9900; Xeon E7-4890 v2 rivals Xeon E5-2697 v2.