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

✅+190.9% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 22 MB).
✅Costs $1,700 less on MSRP ($499 MSRP vs $2,199 MSRP).
✅Delivers 333.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 61.3 vs 14.1 PassMark/$ ($499 MSRP vs $2,199 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 205W, a 140W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Wraith Prism), unlike Xeon W-3245.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3245 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (17,700 vs 18,000).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3245, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Xeon W-3245

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +27.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 24.
✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (22 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 14.1 vs 61.3 PassMark/$ ($2,199 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
❌215.4% higher power demand at 205W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Ryzen 9 3900.

Ryzen 9 3900

2019

Xeon W-3245

2019

Why buy it

✅+190.9% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 22 MB).
✅Costs $1,700 less on MSRP ($499 MSRP vs $2,199 MSRP).
✅Delivers 333.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 61.3 vs 14.1 PassMark/$ ($499 MSRP vs $2,199 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 205W, a 140W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Wraith Prism), unlike Xeon W-3245.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +27.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 24.
✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3245 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (17,700 vs 18,000).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3245, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (22 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 14.1 vs 61.3 PassMark/$ ($2,199 MSRP vs $499 MSRP).
❌215.4% higher power demand at 205W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Ryzen 9 3900.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon W-3245 better than Ryzen 9 3900?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon W-3245 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 gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Xeon W-3245 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 27.1% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon W-3245 is the better fit. You are getting 1.7% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads.

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

Xeon W-3245 is still the faster CPU overall, but Ryzen 9 3900 makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Xeon W-3245 is 340.7% more expensive on MSRP at $2,199 MSRP versus $499 MSRP, and it gives you a 27.1% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. Ryzen 9 3900 is also 333.6% better value on MSRP (61.3 vs 14.1 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

Xeon W-3245 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 32 threads instead of 12/24 and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. 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 W-3245 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Ryzen 9 3900	Xeon W-3245
1080p
low	159 FPS	185 FPS
medium	130 FPS	150 FPS
high	111 FPS	123 FPS
ultra	92 FPS	98 FPS
1440p
low	144 FPS	148 FPS
medium	115 FPS	117 FPS
high	94 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	78 FPS	78 FPS
4K
low	78 FPS	82 FPS
medium	67 FPS	70 FPS
high	53 FPS	56 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	44 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 3900 Open Xeon W-3245

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Ryzen 9 3900	Xeon W-3245
1080p
low	534 FPS	531 FPS
medium	470 FPS	447 FPS
high	384 FPS	372 FPS
ultra	342 FPS	335 FPS
1440p
low	460 FPS	461 FPS
medium	411 FPS	399 FPS
high	347 FPS	336 FPS
ultra	289 FPS	290 FPS
4K
low	288 FPS	287 FPS
medium	261 FPS	248 FPS
high	238 FPS	228 FPS
ultra	213 FPS	199 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 3900 Open Xeon W-3245

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Ryzen 9 3900	Xeon W-3245
1080p
low	709 FPS	777 FPS
medium	589 FPS	777 FPS
high	536 FPS	777 FPS
ultra	472 FPS	777 FPS
1440p
low	541 FPS	777 FPS
medium	448 FPS	715 FPS
high	401 FPS	677 FPS
ultra	347 FPS	603 FPS
4K
low	394 FPS	524 FPS
medium	315 FPS	428 FPS
high	279 FPS	387 FPS
ultra	224 FPS	314 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 3900 Open Xeon W-3245

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Ryzen 9 3900	Xeon W-3245
1080p
low	765 FPS	777 FPS
medium	765 FPS	777 FPS
high	711 FPS	777 FPS
ultra	638 FPS	753 FPS
1440p
low	725 FPS	777 FPS
medium	644 FPS	777 FPS
high	553 FPS	696 FPS
ultra	486 FPS	601 FPS
4K
low	516 FPS	646 FPS
medium	469 FPS	566 FPS
high	411 FPS	504 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	437 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 3900 Open Xeon W-3245

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Ryzen 9 3900 and Xeon W-3245

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 W-3245

The Xeon W-3245 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 June 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Cascade Lake (2019−2020) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.6 GHz. L3 cache: 22 MB. L2 cache: 16 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 205 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 31,089 points. Launch price was $1,999.

⚡

Processing Power

The Ryzen 9 3900 packs 12 cores / 24 threads, while the Xeon W-3245 offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Xeon W-3245 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Ryzen 9 3900 versus 4.6 GHz on the Xeon W-3245 — a 6.7% clock advantage for the Xeon W-3245 (base: 3.1 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The Ryzen 9 3900 uses the Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) architecture (7 nm, 12 nm), while the Xeon W-3245 uses Cascade Lake (2019−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen 9 3900 scores 30,588 against the Xeon W-3245's 31,089 — a 1.6% lead for the Xeon W-3245. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 17,700 vs 18,000 (1.7% advantage for the Xeon W-3245). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,713 vs 1,353, a 23.5% lead for the Ryzen 9 3900 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 10,983 vs 11,698 (6.3% advantage for the Xeon W-3245). L3 cache: 64 MB on the Ryzen 9 3900 vs 22 MB on the Xeon W-3245.

Feature	Ryzen 9 3900	Xeon W-3245
Cores / Threads	12 / 24	16 / 32+33%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz	4.6 GHz+7%
Base Clock	3.1 GHz	3.2 GHz+3%
L3 Cache	64 MB+191%	22 MB
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	16 MB+3100%
Process	7 nm, 12 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)	Cascade Lake (2019−2020)
PassMark	30,588	31,089+2%
Cinebench R23 Multi	17,700	18,000+2%
Geekbench 6 Single	1,713+27%	1,353
Geekbench 6 Multi	10,983	11,698+7%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Ryzen 9 3900 uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon W-3245 uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-3200 memory speed. The Xeon W-3245 supports up to 1024 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Ryzen 9 3900) vs 6 (Xeon W-3245). PCIe lanes: 24 (Ryzen 9 3900) vs 64 (Xeon W-3245) — the Xeon W-3245 offers 40 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: X570,B550,X470,B450 (Ryzen 9 3900) and C621 (Xeon W-3245).

Feature	Ryzen 9 3900	Xeon W-3245
Socket	AM4	LGA3647
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0+33%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-3200	DDR4-2933
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	1024 GB+700%
RAM Channels	2	6+200%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	24	64+167%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Ryzen 9 3900 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Xeon W-3245 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: AMD-V (Ryzen 9 3900) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon W-3245). Primary use case: Ryzen 9 3900 targets Workstation Desktop (low power), Xeon W-3245 targets Professional Workstation. Direct competitor: Ryzen 9 3900 rivals Core i9-9900; Xeon W-3245 rivals Threadripper 2950X.

Feature	Ryzen 9 3900	Xeon W-3245
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	Yes	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	AMD-V	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	Workstation Desktop (low power)	Professional Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

The Ryzen 9 3900 launched at $499 MSRP, while the Xeon W-3245 debuted at $2199. On MSRP ($499 vs $2199), the Ryzen 9 3900 is $1700 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Ryzen 9 3900 delivers 61.3 pts/$ vs 14.1 pts/$ for the Xeon W-3245 — making the Ryzen 9 3900 the 125% better value option.