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 i9-13900H

2023

Why buy it

✅Costs $382 less on MSRP ($617 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
✅Delivers 61.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 44.5 vs 27.5 PassMark/$ ($617 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
✅Draws 45W instead of 180W, a 135W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA1744 with DDR5 support instead of SP3r2 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (27,444 vs 27,487).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper 1950X, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X

2017

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 24 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 0.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 27.5 vs 44.5 PassMark/$ ($999 MSRP vs $617 MSRP).
❌300% higher power demand at 180W vs 45W.
❌Older platform position on SP3r2 with DDR4, while Core i9-13900H moves to FCBGA1744 and DDR5.

Core i9-13900H

2023

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X

2017

Why buy it

✅Costs $382 less on MSRP ($617 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
✅Delivers 61.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 44.5 vs 27.5 PassMark/$ ($617 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
✅Draws 45W instead of 180W, a 135W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA1744 with DDR5 support instead of SP3r2 and DDR4.

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 24 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 0.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (27,444 vs 27,487).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 32 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper 1950X, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 27.5 vs 44.5 PassMark/$ ($999 MSRP vs $617 MSRP).
❌300% higher power demand at 180W vs 45W.
❌Older platform position on SP3r2 with DDR4, while Core i9-13900H moves to FCBGA1744 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i9-13900H better than Ryzen Threadripper 1950X?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Ryzen Threadripper 1950X makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i9-13900H 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 Threadripper 1950X is the better fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 24 MB).

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

Core i9-13900H is the smarter buy today. Core i9-13900H is $382 cheaper on MSRP at $617 MSRP versus $999 MSRP, and it gives you a 1.3% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Ryzen Threadripper 1950X is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.2% better PassMark. It is also 61.7% better value on MSRP (44.5 vs 27.5 PassMark/$), 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?

Core i9-13900H is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2017) and a healthier platform with FCBGA1744 and DDR5 instead of SP3r2. 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 i9-13900H Benchmark Check

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i9-13900H	Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
1080p
low	262 FPS	198 FPS
medium	253 FPS	172 FPS
high	210 FPS	141 FPS
ultra	180 FPS	110 FPS
1440p
low	223 FPS	155 FPS
medium	192 FPS	129 FPS
high	154 FPS	103 FPS
ultra	135 FPS	80 FPS
4K
low	154 FPS	69 FPS
medium	132 FPS	61 FPS
high	101 FPS	48 FPS
ultra	90 FPS	37 FPS

Open Core i9-13900H Open Ryzen Threadripper 1950X

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i9-13900H	Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
1080p
low	636 FPS	407 FPS
medium	543 FPS	365 FPS
high	458 FPS	311 FPS
ultra	417 FPS	259 FPS
1440p
low	554 FPS	348 FPS
medium	492 FPS	318 FPS
high	416 FPS	272 FPS
ultra	357 FPS	224 FPS
4K
low	325 FPS	224 FPS
medium	296 FPS	204 FPS
high	279 FPS	185 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	150 FPS

Open Core i9-13900H Open Ryzen Threadripper 1950X

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i9-13900H	Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
1080p
low	648 FPS	687 FPS
medium	530 FPS	687 FPS
high	467 FPS	687 FPS
ultra	405 FPS	687 FPS
1440p
low	591 FPS	687 FPS
medium	491 FPS	687 FPS
high	427 FPS	656 FPS
ultra	370 FPS	584 FPS
4K
low	434 FPS	519 FPS
medium	374 FPS	428 FPS
high	339 FPS	383 FPS
ultra	290 FPS	321 FPS

Open Core i9-13900H Open Ryzen Threadripper 1950X

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i9-13900H	Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
1080p
low	686 FPS	687 FPS
medium	686 FPS	687 FPS
high	686 FPS	687 FPS
ultra	672 FPS	640 FPS
1440p
low	686 FPS	687 FPS
medium	686 FPS	687 FPS
high	626 FPS	611 FPS
ultra	552 FPS	510 FPS
4K
low	555 FPS	578 FPS
medium	504 FPS	517 FPS
high	451 FPS	458 FPS
ultra	394 FPS	382 FPS

Open Core i9-13900H Open Ryzen Threadripper 1950X

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i9-13900H and Ryzen Threadripper 1950X

Core i9-13900H

The Core i9-13900H is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 January 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-H (2023−2024) architecture. It features 14 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 24 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1744. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 27,444 points. Launch price was $617.

Ryzen Threadripper 1950X

The Ryzen Threadripper 1950X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 10 August 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Zen (2017−2020) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3r2. Thermal design power (TDP): 180 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Quad-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 27,487 points. Launch price was $999.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i9-13900H packs 14 cores / 20 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.4 GHz on the Core i9-13900H versus 4 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X — a 29.8% clock advantage for the Core i9-13900H (base: 2.6 GHz vs 3.4 GHz). The Core i9-13900H uses the Raptor Lake-H (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X uses Zen (2017−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i9-13900H scores 27,444 against the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X's 27,487 — a 0.2% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X. L3 cache: 24 MB (total) on the Core i9-13900H vs 32 MB on the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X.

Feature	Core i9-13900H	Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
Cores / Threads	14 / 20	16 / 32+14%
Boost Clock	5.4 GHz+35%	4 GHz
Base Clock	2.6 GHz	3.4 GHz+31%
L3 Cache	24 MB (total)	32 MB+33%
L2 Cache	2 MB (per core)+300%	512K (per core)
Process	Intel 7 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake-H (2023−2024)	Zen (2017−2020)
PassMark	27,444	27,487
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,040
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	9,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i9-13900H uses the FCBGA1744 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X uses SP3r2 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i9-13900H	Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
Socket	FCBGA1744	SP3r2
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR4-2666
Max RAM Capacity	—	256 GB
RAM Channels	—	4
ECC Support	—	Yes
PCIe Lanes	—	64

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Core i9-13900H) / AMD-V (Ryzen Threadripper 1950X). Primary use case: Ryzen Threadripper 1950X targets Workstation.

Feature	Core i9-13900H	Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
Integrated GPU	—	No
Unlocked	—	Yes
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	AMD-V
Target Use	—	Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i9-13900H launched at $617 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X debuted at $999. On MSRP ($617 vs $999), the Core i9-13900H is $382 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i9-13900H delivers 44.5 pts/$ vs 27.5 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X — making the Core i9-13900H the 47.1% better value option.