Ryzen 9 6900HS vs Ryzen 9 3950X

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 9 3950X
2019
16 cores / 32 threads, 105 Watt
25.32
+64.3%

Ryzen 9 3950X outperforms Ryzen 9 6900HS by an impressive 64% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 9 3950X and Ryzen 9 6900HS processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking202471
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation17.84no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD Ryzen 9no data
Power efficiency21.9940.15
Architecture codenameMatisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)Rembrandt-H (Zen 3+) (2022)
Release date11 June 2019 (5 years ago)January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$799no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 9 3950X and Ryzen 9 6900HS basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores16 (Hexadeca-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads3216
Base clock speed3.5 GHz3.3 GHz
Boost clock speed4.7 GHz4.9 GHz
L1 cache1 MB64K (per core)
L2 cache8 MB512K (per core)
L3 cache64 MB16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm, 12 nm6 nm
Die size2 x 72 mm + 125 mm (IO-Die) mm2208 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data95 °C
Number of transistors19,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 9 3950X and Ryzen 9 6900HS compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketAM4FP7
Power consumption (TDP)105 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 9 3950X and Ryzen 9 6900HS. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x MMX(+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A,-64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA, Precision Boost 2MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX++
Precision Boost 2++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 9 3950X and Ryzen 9 6900HS are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 9 3950X and Ryzen 9 6900HS. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Dual-channelDDR5
Maximum memory size128 GBno data
Maximum memory bandwidth51.196 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card-AMD Radeon 680M

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 9 3950X and Ryzen 9 6900HS.

PCIe versionno data4.0
PCI Express lanesno data20

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Ryzen 9 3950X 25.32
+64.3%
Ryzen 9 6900HS 15.41

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Ryzen 9 3950X 38750
+64.3%
Ryzen 9 6900HS 23581

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Ryzen 9 3950X 1735
Ryzen 9 6900HS 1854
+6.9%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Ryzen 9 3950X 10819
+22.9%
Ryzen 9 6900HS 8804

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Ryzen 9 3950X 6102
Ryzen 9 6900HS 6405
+5%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Ryzen 9 3950X 53396
+33.6%
Ryzen 9 6900HS 39960

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Ryzen 9 3950X 4.11
+33.6%
Ryzen 9 6900HS 5.49

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Ryzen 9 3950X 44
+76.5%
Ryzen 9 6900HS 25

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Ryzen 9 3950X 4002
+85.2%
Ryzen 9 6900HS 2161

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Ryzen 9 3950X 209
Ryzen 9 6900HS 245
+17.2%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Ryzen 9 3950X 2.37
Ryzen 9 6900HS 2.95
+24.5%

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Ryzen 9 3950X 10.8
Ryzen 9 6900HS 11.1
+2.8%

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Ryzen 9 3950X 168
+35.9%
Ryzen 9 6900HS 124

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Ryzen 9 3950X 265
Ryzen 9 6900HS 266
+0.2%

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Ryzen 9 3950X 7409
+14.2%
Ryzen 9 6900HS 6488

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Ryzen 9 3950X 12363
+34%
Ryzen 9 6900HS 9224

Blender(-)

Ryzen 9 3950X 126
Ryzen 9 6900HS 227
+80.4%

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Ryzen 9 3950X 1306
Ryzen 9 6900HS 1537
+17.7%

7-Zip Single

Ryzen 9 3950X 5340
Ryzen 9 6900HS 5805
+8.7%

7-Zip

Ryzen 9 3950X 99467
+60.4%
Ryzen 9 6900HS 62006

WebXPRT 3

Ryzen 9 3950X 239
Ryzen 9 6900HS 281
+17.6%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 25.32 15.41
Physical cores 16 8
Threads 32 16
Chip lithography 7 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 105 Watt 35 Watt

Ryzen 9 3950X has a 64.3% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Ryzen 9 6900HS, on the other hand, has a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 9 3950X is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 9 6900HS in performance tests.

Note that Ryzen 9 3950X is a desktop processor while Ryzen 9 6900HS is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 9 3950X and Ryzen 9 6900HS, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Ryzen 9 3950X
Ryzen 9 3950X
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS
Ryzen 9 6900HS

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.5 711 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 3950X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 137 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 6900HS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 9 3950X or Ryzen 9 6900HS, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.