Pick two CPUs. You get a margin, and its size. That is the whole tool.
The numbers come from aggregated 1080p benchmarks. That is the standard way to rank processors against each other, because at 1080p the graphics card stops being the limiter and you are measuring the chip.
Now the limits. Here is what I would not use this for.
This is a 1080p gaming ranking for the source’s test suite. It does not measure productivity or predict the gap at every resolution. A workload limited by the graphics card can show a smaller CPU difference; check matched game tests before applying that expectation to your build.
Multi-core work reorders the list. Completely. If you render or compile, read those benchmarks instead. Core count decides it, and this tool does not measure core count.
Scores come from the Tom’s Hardware CPU benchmarks hierarchy, using the captured table updated August 26, 2026 (re-read September 23). I have not re-run those benchmarks myself. The tool retains that snapshot.
Two companion tools. The CPU and GPU benchmark lookup shows a processor’s benchmark index beside a graphics card’s index at 1080p, 1440p or 4K. The GPU Comparison Tool does this same job for graphics cards.
How to compare two processors
- Choose a model under First CPU, then another under Second CPU. Both menus contain the same 30 processors; an absent model has no score in this captured dataset.
- Read the two scores and the gaming margin. The bars compare the selected processors, while the scores retain the source table’s reference of 100. A lead below 2% produces the tool’s “evenly matched” verdict.
- Use Copy shareable link to preserve the pair. Choosing the same processor twice asks you to select two different CPUs.
For a full CPU comparison chart, open the 30-processor gaming hierarchy. Need actual frame rates? Follow the source benchmarks, find your game, and check the test system and settings before assuming that the result describes the performance of your own processor and graphics card. This tool’s scores are not FPS or GHz. It does not run a benchmark on your PC or rank productivity work.
Keep CPU and GPU scores separate. The CPU and GPU lookup explains how to test a performance limit; subtracting the two indexes does not measure a bottleneck. A higher clock speed alone is not the comparison this gaming chart makes.
Worked examples
Ryzen 7 9700X comparisons and 1440p
The captured 30-CPU table includes the Ryzen 9 9900X, Ryzen 7 7800X3D and Ryzen 7 9800X3D. It does not include the Ryzen 7 9700X. This tool therefore cannot calculate a 9700X-versus-9800X3D result, and substituting the 9900X or 7700X would answer a different question.
For 9700X vs 7800X3D at 1440p, look for both processors in the same review’s game tests with the same GPU and memory configuration, matching the game preset and upscaling state. Record averages and lows for the games you play. A 1080p aggregate cannot supply the missing 1440p measurements or a guaranteed upper bound on the gap. The CPU-limit testing workflow can help investigate your existing system; it does not manufacture a missing comparison.
Comparisons available in this captured table
These are this calculator’s own outputs, computed with the same formula the tool runs in your browser — so you can see a real answer without touching a single input.
The tool’s own default comparison, and the classic cross-brand question: is the older AMD cache chip still ahead of Intel’s mainstream K part? (X3D-vs-non-X3D, so the cache explanation appears.)
- Inputs: A = Ryzen 7 7800X3D, index 85.6 (group ‘AMD Ryzen X3D’). B = Core i7-14700K, index 76.4 (group ‘Intel Core 12th-14th Gen’). These are the two processors the tool loads when you open the page.
- Result: Headline: “Ryzen 7 7800X3D is 12% faster in gaming”. Subline: “Ryzen 7 7800X3D vs Core i7-14700K - 1080p gaming index”. Bars: A - Ryzen 7 7800X3D, “85.6 / 100”, 100% width. B - Core i7-14700K, “76.4 / 100”, 89% width (dimmed). Stats: Winner (gaming) = A | Margin = 12% | Basis = 1080p gaming. Recommendation text: “Ryzen 7 7800X3D leads by 12% in 1080p gaming.” followed by the 3D V-Cache sentence (“The Ryzen 7 7800X3D has 3D V-Cache, which is why it leads in games despite raw clocks…”) and the resolution caveat.
The most-searched upgrade question on this site (it has its own linked article): should a 7800X3D owner move to the 9800X3D? Both are X3D, which demonstrates the cache-explainer rule NOT firing
- Inputs: A = Ryzen 7 7800X3D, index 85.6. B = Ryzen 7 9800X3D, index 97.0. Both from the ‘AMD Ryzen X3D’ group.
- Result: Headline: “Ryzen 7 9800X3D is 13% faster in gaming”. Bars: A - Ryzen 7 7800X3D, “85.6 / 100”, 88% width (dimmed). B - Ryzen 7 9800X3D, “97.0 / 100”, 100% width. Stats: Winner (gaming) = B | Margin = 13% | Basis = 1080p gaming. Recommendation text: “Ryzen 7 9800X3D leads by 13% in 1080p gaming.” with NO 3D V-Cache sentence (both chips are X3D), then straight to the resolution and multi-core caveat.
A real mid-range cross-brand shortlist the tool treats as a tie: Ryzen 5 9600X vs Core i5-14600K. This is the case that produces the ’evenly matched’ verdict instead of a percentage
- Inputs: A = Ryzen 5 9600X, index 72.6 (group ‘AMD Ryzen (non-X3D)’). B = Core i5-14600K, index 72.8 (group ‘Intel Core 12th-14th Gen’).
- Result: Headline: “Ryzen 5 9600X and Core i5-14600K are evenly matched in gaming”. Bars: A - Ryzen 5 9600X, “72.6 / 100”, 100% width (dimmed). B - Core i5-14600K, “72.8 / 100”, 100% width. Stats: Winner (gaming) = Tie | Margin = <2% | Basis = 1080p gaming. Recommendation text: “Effectively tied for gaming. At 1080p these two land within a couple percent. Check motherboard compatibility before buying. Compare total CPU-and-board cost, power and cooling requirements, and benchmarks for any multi-core work you do outside games.”
How to read the result
The number compares two scores from one 1080p test suite. It is not a universal maximum difference between those processors. A faster GPU and lower resolution can expose a CPU limit, but a result at 1440p or 4K needs measurements at that resolution. Keep the GPU and memory configuration fixed when comparing reviews. Match each game’s preset too.
Why X3D chips win games
If a lower-clocked, cheaper AMD chip is beating a pricier one in this ranking, the reason is almost always cache. AMD’s X3D processors stack extra L3 cache onto the die. Games constantly request small pieces of data, and a bigger cache serves more of those requests instantly instead of waiting on slower system memory. The payoff shows up most in simulation, strategy, and esports titles that live and die on memory latency. That is how a Ryzen 7 7800X3D or 9800X3D beats higher-clocked, more expensive chips in games while drawing less power, even when those same chips pull ahead in raw multi-core work.
Gaming and productivity do not rank the same
This tool ranks gaming, and gaming only. A chip that wins games can lose at rendering, compiling, or video encoding, where core and thread count matter more than the cache and latency that win games. The clean example is the X3D line again: it leads in gaming on cache, but a same-price non-X3D or Intel chip with more cores can finish a render faster. If your machine does real productivity work, treat this as the gaming half of the decision and check multi-core benchmarks for the other half before you buy.
The free frames most people leave on the table
Two builds with the same processor can differ several percent on memory alone, because gaming is sensitive to memory latency and bandwidth. The index here assumes your memory is running at its rated speed, which means the EXPO profile on AMD or XMP on Intel is switched on in the BIOS. Out of the box it often is not. Enabling it is one of the cheapest ways to close a gaming gap, and a slow-rated kit can quietly cost you frames on even a strong chip.
When the measured gap is small, compare the whole platform cost against what your workload needs. The 7800X3D vs 9800X3D upgrade guide and 7800X3D review provide more context, while the PC Builder helps balance system choices. None turns an absent 9700X score into a tested result.
Assumptions and sources
- Every CPU index in the menus is drawn from the captured Tom’s Hardware CPU benchmarks hierarchy table updated August 26, 2026 (re-read September 23): a 17-game geometric mean at 1080p on an RTX 5090, normalized to the Ryzen 7 9850X3D at 100. Chips absent from that table have no estimated score here.
- The “evenly matched” verdict below a 2% gap is a TechFuelHQ editorial threshold, chosen because a margin that small sits inside the run-to-run noise of game benchmarking.
- The percentage compares the two captured aggregate indexes directly, with no extra weighting. It does not estimate another resolution, game or test configuration.