Ryzen 9 4900H vs Ryzen 9 3900X

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 9 3900X
2019
12 cores / 24 threads, 125 Watt
20.53
+70.2%
Ryzen 9 4900H
2020
8 cores / 16 threads, 54 Watt
12.06

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Ryzen 9 4900H by an impressive 70% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 9 4900H processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking269635
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation20.91no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD Ryzen 9AMD Renoir (Ryzen 4000 APU)
Power efficiency15.5421.14
Architecture codenameMatisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)Renoir-H (Zen 2) (2020)
Release date7 July 2019 (5 years ago)16 March 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 9 4900H 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 cores12 (Dodeca-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads2416
Base clock speed3.8 GHz3.3 GHz
Boost clock speed4.6 GHz4.4 GHz
Multiplierno data33
L1 cache96K (per core)128K (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache64 MB12 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm, 12 nm7 nm
Die sizeno data156 mm2
Maximum core temperature95 °C105 °C
Number of transistors19,200 million9800 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 9 4900H 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
SocketAM4FP6
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt54 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 9 4900H. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX (+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA, SHA
AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX++
Precision Boost 2+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 9 4900H are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 9 4900H. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Dual-channelDDR4
Maximum memory size128 GB64 GB
Max memory channels24
Maximum memory bandwidth51.196 GB/s68.27 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card-AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) ( - 1750 MHz)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 9 4900H.

PCIe versionno data3.0

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 3900X 20.53
+70.2%
Ryzen 9 4900H 12.06

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 3900X 32617
+70.3%
Ryzen 9 4900H 19154

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 3900X 1710
+10.3%
Ryzen 9 4900H 1550

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 3900X 9947
+47.6%
Ryzen 9 4900H 6738

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 3900X 6019
+1.2%
Ryzen 9 4900H 5946

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 3900X 45539
+13.1%
Ryzen 9 4900H 40253

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 3900X 2.69
+18.6%
Ryzen 9 4900H 3.19

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 3900X 34
+47.1%
Ryzen 9 4900H 23

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 3900X 3049
+58.3%
Ryzen 9 4900H 1927

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 3900X 207
+7.3%
Ryzen 9 4900H 193

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 3900X 2.36
+5.4%
Ryzen 9 4900H 2.24

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 3900X 10.8
+45.3%
Ryzen 9 4900H 7.4

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 3900X 147
+32.4%
Ryzen 9 4900H 111

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 3900X 268
+24.4%
Ryzen 9 4900H 215

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 3900X 7534
+75.3%
Ryzen 9 4900H 4297

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Ryzen 9 3900X 10498
+31%
Ryzen 9 4900H 8012

Blender(-)

Ryzen 9 3900X 162
Ryzen 9 4900H 247
+52.4%

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Ryzen 9 3900X 1250
+1.5%
Ryzen 9 4900H 1232

7-Zip Single

Ryzen 9 3900X 5316
+12.5%
Ryzen 9 4900H 4727

7-Zip

Ryzen 9 3900X 80935
+65.3%
Ryzen 9 4900H 48976

WebXPRT 3

Ryzen 9 3900X 225
Ryzen 9 4900H 227
+0.9%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.53 12.06
Recency 7 July 2019 16 March 2020
Physical cores 12 8
Threads 24 16
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 54 Watt

Ryzen 9 3900X has a 70.2% higher aggregate performance score, and 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads.

Ryzen 9 4900H, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 months, and 131.5% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 9 3900X is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 9 4900H in performance tests.

Note that Ryzen 9 3900X is a desktop processor while Ryzen 9 4900H is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 9 4900H, 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 3900X
Ryzen 9 3900X
AMD Ryzen 9 4900H
Ryzen 9 4900H

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.


4.7 5145 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 3900X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 240 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 4900H on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 9 3900X or Ryzen 9 4900H, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.