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 3950X

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 24 MB).
✅Costs $681 less on MSRP ($749 MSRP vs $1,430 MSRP).
✅Delivers 87.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 51.4 vs 27.5 PassMark/$ ($749 MSRP vs $1,430 MSRP).
✅Draws 105W instead of 250W, a 145W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (38,519 vs 39,293).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3335, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Xeon W-3335

2021

Why buy it

✅+2% higher PassMark.
✅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 Ryzen 9 3950X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 27.5 vs 51.4 PassMark/$ ($1,430 MSRP vs $749 MSRP).
❌138.1% higher power demand at 250W vs 105W.

Ryzen 9 3950X

2019

Xeon W-3335

2021

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 24 MB).
✅Costs $681 less on MSRP ($749 MSRP vs $1,430 MSRP).
✅Delivers 87.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 51.4 vs 27.5 PassMark/$ ($749 MSRP vs $1,430 MSRP).
✅Draws 105W instead of 250W, a 145W reduction.

Why buy it

✅+2% higher PassMark.
✅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

❌Lower PassMark (38,519 vs 39,293).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3335, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 3950X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 27.5 vs 51.4 PassMark/$ ($1,430 MSRP vs $749 MSRP).
❌138.1% higher power demand at 250W vs 105W.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 9 3950X better than Xeon W-3335?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon W-3335 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Ryzen 9 3950X 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, Xeon W-3335 is the better fit. You are getting 2% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads.

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

Ryzen 9 3950X is the smarter buy today. Ryzen 9 3950X is $681 cheaper on MSRP at $749 MSRP versus $1,430 MSRP, and it gives you a 3.1% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Xeon W-3335 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 2% better PassMark. It is also 87.2% better value on MSRP (51.4 vs 27.5 PassMark/$), 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?

Xeon W-3335 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2021 vs 2019), more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 32 threads instead of 16/32, 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 3950X Benchmark Check

Xeon W-3335 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Ryzen 9 3950X	Xeon W-3335
1080p
low	207 FPS	182 FPS
medium	182 FPS	144 FPS
high	147 FPS	118 FPS
ultra	119 FPS	92 FPS
1440p
low	167 FPS	148 FPS
medium	138 FPS	115 FPS
high	109 FPS	93 FPS
ultra	91 FPS	72 FPS
4K
low	89 FPS	68 FPS
medium	79 FPS	57 FPS
high	62 FPS	45 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	36 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 3950X Open Xeon W-3335

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Ryzen 9 3950X	Xeon W-3335
1080p
low	701 FPS	447 FPS
medium	616 FPS	385 FPS
high	497 FPS	316 FPS
ultra	438 FPS	266 FPS
1440p
low	580 FPS	385 FPS
medium	519 FPS	342 FPS
high	439 FPS	287 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	237 FPS
4K
low	340 FPS	248 FPS
medium	306 FPS	223 FPS
high	283 FPS	199 FPS
ultra	252 FPS	165 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 3950X Open Xeon W-3335

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Ryzen 9 3950X	Xeon W-3335
1080p
low	871 FPS	982 FPS
medium	701 FPS	962 FPS
high	623 FPS	905 FPS
ultra	520 FPS	819 FPS
1440p
low	710 FPS	836 FPS
medium	572 FPS	736 FPS
high	498 FPS	692 FPS
ultra	422 FPS	618 FPS
4K
low	494 FPS	537 FPS
medium	412 FPS	438 FPS
high	365 FPS	386 FPS
ultra	307 FPS	315 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 3950X Open Xeon W-3335

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Ryzen 9 3950X	Xeon W-3335
1080p
low	963 FPS	982 FPS
medium	963 FPS	868 FPS
high	887 FPS	751 FPS
ultra	796 FPS	639 FPS
1440p
low	881 FPS	790 FPS
medium	772 FPS	676 FPS
high	678 FPS	582 FPS
ultra	597 FPS	496 FPS
4K
low	648 FPS	550 FPS
medium	577 FPS	480 FPS
high	513 FPS	429 FPS
ultra	437 FPS	363 FPS

Open Ryzen 9 3950X Open Xeon W-3335

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Ryzen 9 3950X and Xeon W-3335

Ryzen 9 3950X

The Ryzen 9 3950X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 14 November 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.7 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 38,519 points. Launch price was $799.

Xeon W-3335

The Xeon W-3335 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Ice Lake-W (2021) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 24 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4189. Thermal design power (TDP): 250 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 39,293 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Ryzen 9 3950X and Xeon W-3335 share an identical 16-core/32-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.7 GHz on the Ryzen 9 3950X versus 4 GHz on the Xeon W-3335 — a 16.1% clock advantage for the Ryzen 9 3950X (base: 3.5 GHz vs 3.4 GHz). The Ryzen 9 3950X uses the Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020) architecture (7 nm, 12 nm), while the Xeon W-3335 uses Ice Lake-W (2021) (10 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen 9 3950X scores 38,519 against the Xeon W-3335's 39,293 — a 2% lead for the Xeon W-3335. L3 cache: 64 MB on the Ryzen 9 3950X vs 24 MB (total) on the Xeon W-3335.

Feature	Ryzen 9 3950X	Xeon W-3335
Cores / Threads	16 / 32	16 / 32
Boost Clock	4.7 GHz+18%	4 GHz
Base Clock	3.5 GHz+3%	3.4 GHz
L3 Cache	64 MB+167%	24 MB (total)
L2 Cache	512K (per core)	1 MB (per core)+100%
Process	7 nm, 12 nm-30%	10 nm
Architecture	Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)	Ice Lake-W (2021)
PassMark	38,519	39,293+2%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Ryzen 9 3950X uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon W-3335 uses LGA4189 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-3200 on the Ryzen 9 3950X versus 3200 on the Xeon W-3335 — the Xeon W-3335 supports 199.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon W-3335 supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 128 GB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Ryzen 9 3950X) vs 8 (Xeon W-3335). PCIe lanes: 24 (Ryzen 9 3950X) vs 64 (Xeon W-3335) — the Xeon W-3335 offers 40 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: X570,B550 (Ryzen 9 3950X) and W790 (Xeon W-3335).

Feature	Ryzen 9 3950X	Xeon W-3335
Socket	AM4	LGA4189
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-3200	3200+79900%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB+3276700%	4096
RAM Channels	2	8+300%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	24	64+167%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Ryzen 9 3950X has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Xeon W-3335 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: AMD-V (Ryzen 9 3950X) vs VT-x, VT-d (Xeon W-3335). Direct competitor: Xeon W-3335 rivals EPYC 7402.

Feature	Ryzen 9 3950X	Xeon W-3335
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	—	None
Unlocked	Yes	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	AMD-V	VT-x, VT-d

💰

Value Analysis

The Ryzen 9 3950X launched at $749 MSRP, while the Xeon W-3335 debuted at $1430. On MSRP ($749 vs $1430), the Ryzen 9 3950X is $681 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Ryzen 9 3950X delivers 51.4 pts/$ vs 27.5 pts/$ for the Xeon W-3335 — making the Ryzen 9 3950X the 60.7% better value option.