Core i7-4790 vs Xeon Phi 7210

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.

Core i7-4790 vs Xeon Phi 7210 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i7-4790 vs Xeon Phi 7210: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i7-4790

2014

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,542 less on MSRP ($339 MSRP vs $1,881 MSRP).
✅Delivers 451.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 21.4 vs 3.9 PassMark/$ ($339 MSRP vs $1,881 MSRP).
✅Draws 84W instead of 215W, a 131W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (7,263 vs 7,306).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon Phi 7210, which brings 64 cores / 256 threads.

Xeon Phi 7210

2016

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 256 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 3.9 vs 21.4 PassMark/$ ($1,881 MSRP vs $339 MSRP).
❌156% higher power demand at 215W vs 84W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-4790 better than Xeon Phi 7210?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon Phi 7210 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-4790 is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon Phi 7210 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 64 cores and 256 threads.

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

Core i7-4790 is the better buy right now. Core i7-4790 comes in $1,542 cheaper on MSRP at $339 MSRP versus $1,881 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Xeon Phi 7210 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.6% better PassMark. It is also 451.6% better value on MSRP (21.4 vs 3.9 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Xeon Phi 7210 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2014) and more multi-core headroom with 64 cores / 256 threads instead of 4/8. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i7-4790 vs Xeon Phi 7210 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i7-4790

The Core i7-4790 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 May 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 84 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 7,263 points. Launch price was $303.

Xeon Phi 7210

The Xeon Phi 7210 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Knights Landing (2016) architecture. It features 64 cores and 256 threads. Base frequency is 1.3 GHz, with boost up to 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 215 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 7,306 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-4790 packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon Phi 7210 offers 64 cores / 256 threads — the Xeon Phi 7210 has 60 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the Core i7-4790 versus 1.5 GHz on the Xeon Phi 7210 — a 90.9% clock advantage for the Core i7-4790 (base: 3.6 GHz vs 1.3 GHz). The Core i7-4790 uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Xeon Phi 7210 uses Knights Landing (2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-4790 scores 7,263 against the Xeon Phi 7210's 7,306 — a 0.6% lead for the Xeon Phi 7210. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core i7-4790 vs 0 kB (total) on the Xeon Phi 7210.

Feature	Core i7-4790	Xeon Phi 7210
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	64 / 256+1500%
Boost Clock	4 GHz+167%	1.5 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+177%	1.3 GHz
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	0 kB (total)
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	512 kB (per core)+100%
Process	22 nm	14 nm-36%
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Knights Landing (2016)
PassMark	7,263	7,306

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-4790 uses the LGA1150 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon Phi 7210 uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-4790	Xeon Phi 7210
Socket	LGA1150	LGA3647
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i7-4790 was priced at $339, while the Xeon Phi 7210 came in at $1881. On launch pricing ($339 vs $1881), Core i7-4790 was $1542 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-4790 delivers 21.4 pts/$ vs 3.9 pts/$ for the Xeon Phi 7210 — making the Core i7-4790 the 138.6% better value option.

Feature	Core i7-4790	Xeon Phi 7210
MSRP	$339-82%	$1881
Performance per Dollar	21.4+449%	3.9
Release Date	2014	2016

Search Core i7-4790 on Amazon

Search Xeon Phi 7210 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.