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 AI Max 390

2025

Why buy it

✅+1.4% higher PassMark.
✅+66.2% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 39 MB).
✅Draws 55W instead of 205W, a 150W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FP11 with DDR5 support instead of LGA3647 and DDR4.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with AMD Radeon 8050S, while Xeon W-3275 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3275 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3275, which brings 28 cores / 56 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Xeon W-3275

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 28 cores / 56 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 28.
✅128.6% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 28) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (41,267 vs 41,834).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (39 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $4,449 MSRP, while Ryzen AI Max 390 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌272.7% higher power demand at 205W vs 55W.
❌Older platform position on LGA3647 with DDR4, while Ryzen AI Max 390 moves to FP11 and DDR5.

Ryzen AI Max 390

2025

Xeon W-3275

2019

Why buy it

✅+1.4% higher PassMark.
✅+66.2% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 39 MB).
✅Draws 55W instead of 205W, a 150W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FP11 with DDR5 support instead of LGA3647 and DDR4.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with AMD Radeon 8050S, while Xeon W-3275 needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 28 cores / 56 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 28.
✅128.6% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 28) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3275 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3275, which brings 28 cores / 56 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (41,267 vs 41,834).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (39 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $4,449 MSRP, while Ryzen AI Max 390 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌272.7% higher power demand at 205W vs 55W.
❌Older platform position on LGA3647 with DDR4, while Ryzen AI Max 390 moves to FP11 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen AI Max 390 better than Xeon W-3275?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon W-3275 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Ryzen AI Max 390 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 AI Max 390 is the better fit. You are getting 1.4% better PassMark, backed by 12 cores and 24 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 66.2% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 39 MB).

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

Ryzen AI Max 390 is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon W-3275 makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Ryzen AI Max 390 is at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $4,449 MSRP, and it gives you 1.4% better PassMark. The trade-off is that Xeon W-3275 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 5.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Xeon W-3275 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (9.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

Ryzen AI Max 390 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2019), a healthier platform with FP11 and DDR5 instead of LGA3647, 66.2% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 39 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 12 cores / 24 threads instead of 28/56. 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.

Ryzen AI Max 390 Benchmark Check

Xeon W-3275 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Ryzen AI Max 390	Xeon W-3275
1080p
low	265 FPS	198 FPS
medium	241 FPS	162 FPS
high	205 FPS	132 FPS
ultra	178 FPS	106 FPS
1440p
low	252 FPS	159 FPS
medium	206 FPS	125 FPS
high	162 FPS	100 FPS
ultra	146 FPS	83 FPS
4K
low	175 FPS	87 FPS
medium	143 FPS	74 FPS
high	107 FPS	58 FPS
ultra	96 FPS	47 FPS

Open Ryzen AI Max 390 Open Xeon W-3275

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Ryzen AI Max 390	Xeon W-3275
1080p
low	671 FPS	607 FPS
medium	578 FPS	522 FPS
high	435 FPS	420 FPS
ultra	376 FPS	371 FPS
1440p
low	564 FPS	514 FPS
medium	503 FPS	447 FPS
high	392 FPS	370 FPS
ultra	312 FPS	306 FPS
4K
low	318 FPS	306 FPS
medium	288 FPS	266 FPS
high	255 FPS	243 FPS
ultra	219 FPS	213 FPS

Open Ryzen AI Max 390 Open Xeon W-3275

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Ryzen AI Max 390	Xeon W-3275
1080p
low	769 FPS	1025 FPS
medium	602 FPS	928 FPS
high	526 FPS	876 FPS
ultra	442 FPS	793 FPS
1440p
low	668 FPS	808 FPS
medium	527 FPS	715 FPS
high	457 FPS	675 FPS
ultra	387 FPS	605 FPS
4K
low	478 FPS	519 FPS
medium	395 FPS	429 FPS
high	351 FPS	387 FPS
ultra	292 FPS	315 FPS

Open Ryzen AI Max 390 Open Xeon W-3275

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Ryzen AI Max 390	Xeon W-3275
1080p
low	1046 FPS	1032 FPS
medium	953 FPS	1014 FPS
high	833 FPS	885 FPS
ultra	751 FPS	773 FPS
1440p
low	838 FPS	932 FPS
medium	746 FPS	804 FPS
high	652 FPS	702 FPS
ultra	566 FPS	603 FPS
4K
low	616 FPS	680 FPS
medium	552 FPS	591 FPS
high	487 FPS	521 FPS
ultra	422 FPS	437 FPS

Open Ryzen AI Max 390 Open Xeon W-3275

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Ryzen AI Max 390 and Xeon W-3275

Ryzen AI Max 390

The Ryzen AI Max 390 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 6 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Strix Halo (2025) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FP11. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 41,834 points. Launch price was $499.

Xeon W-3275

The Xeon W-3275 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 28 cores and 56 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.6 GHz. L3 cache: 38.5 MB. L2 cache: 28 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 205 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 41,267 points. Launch price was $4,449.

⚡

Processing Power

The Ryzen AI Max 390 packs 12 cores / 24 threads, while the Xeon W-3275 offers 28 cores / 56 threads — the Xeon W-3275 has 16 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5 GHz on the Ryzen AI Max 390 versus 4.6 GHz on the Xeon W-3275 — a 8.3% clock advantage for the Ryzen AI Max 390 (base: 3.2 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The Ryzen AI Max 390 uses the Strix Halo (2025) architecture (4 nm), while the Xeon W-3275 uses Cascade Lake (2019−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen AI Max 390 scores 41,834 against the Xeon W-3275's 41,267 — a 1.4% lead for the Ryzen AI Max 390. L3 cache: 64 MB (total) on the Ryzen AI Max 390 vs 38.5 MB on the Xeon W-3275.

Feature	Ryzen AI Max 390	Xeon W-3275
Cores / Threads	12 / 24	28 / 56+133%
Boost Clock	5 GHz+9%	4.6 GHz
Base Clock	3.2 GHz+28%	2.5 GHz
L3 Cache	64 MB (total)+66%	38.5 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	28 MB+2700%
Process	4 nm-71%	14 nm
Architecture	Strix Halo (2025)	Cascade Lake (2019−2020)
PassMark	41,834+1%	41,267

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Ryzen AI Max 390 uses the FP11 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon W-3275 uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 8000 on the Ryzen AI Max 390 versus 3200 on the Xeon W-3275 — the Ryzen AI Max 390 supports 85.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon W-3275 supports up to 1024 of RAM compared to 128 — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 4 (Ryzen AI Max 390) vs 6 (Xeon W-3275). PCIe lanes: 28 (Ryzen AI Max 390) vs 64 (Xeon W-3275) — the Xeon W-3275 offers 36 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Strix Halo (Ryzen AI Max 390) and C621 (Xeon W-3275).

Feature	Ryzen AI Max 390	Xeon W-3275
Socket	FP11	LGA3647
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0+33%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	8000+150%	3200
Max RAM Capacity	128	1024+700%
RAM Channels	4	6+50%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	28	64+129%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Ryzen AI Max 390 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V (Ryzen AI Max 390) vs VT-x, VT-d (Xeon W-3275). The Ryzen AI Max 390 includes integrated graphics (AMD Radeon 8050S), while the Xeon W-3275 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Ryzen AI Max 390 rivals Apple M4 Max; Xeon W-3275 rivals Threadripper 3970X.

Feature	Ryzen AI Max 390	Xeon W-3275
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	AMD Radeon 8050S	None
Unlocked	Yes	No
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V	VT-x, VT-d

💰

Value Analysis

The Ryzen AI Max 390 launched at $0 MSRP, while the Xeon W-3275 debuted at $4449. On MSRP ($0 vs $4449), the Ryzen AI Max 390 is $4449 cheaper.