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 i7-9700K vs Xeon E5-2640 v2 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 i7-9700K vs Xeon E5-2640 v2: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i7-9700K

2018

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +60.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $3,730 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $4,115 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1918.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.4 vs 1.9 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $4,115 MSRP).
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon E5-2640 v2 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 20 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2640 v2, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.

Xeon E5-2640 v2

2013

Why buy it

✅+66.7% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅150% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (7,625 vs 14,397).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 1.9 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($4,115 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-9700K better than Xeon E5-2640 v2?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-2640 v2 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-9700K is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i7-9700K is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 60.0% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-9700K is the stronger fit. You are getting 88.8% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 8 threads.

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

Core i7-9700K is the better buy right now. Core i7-9700K comes in $3,730 cheaper on MSRP at $385 MSRP versus $4,115 MSRP, and it still gives you a 60.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 1918.1% better value on MSRP (37.4 vs 1.9 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core i7-9700K makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2018 vs 2013) and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 8 threads instead of 8/16. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i7-9700K vs Xeon E5-2640 v2 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-9700K

The Core i7-9700K is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 19 October 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 14,397 points. Launch price was $374.

Xeon E5-2640 v2

The Xeon E5-2640 v2 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge-EP (2013) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 20 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 7,625 points. Launch price was $728.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, matching the Xeon E5-2640 v2's 8 cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 2.5 GHz on the Xeon E5-2640 v2 — a 64.9% clock advantage for the Core i7-9700K (base: 3.6 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Core i7-9700K uses the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E5-2640 v2 uses Ivy Bridge-EP (2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the Xeon E5-2640 v2's 7,625 — a 61.5% lead for the Core i7-9700K. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 20 MB (total) on the Xeon E5-2640 v2.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E5-2640 v2
Cores / Threads	8 / 8	8 / 16
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz+96%	2.5 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+80%	2 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	20 MB (total)+67%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019)	Ivy Bridge-EP (2013)
PassMark	14,397+89%	7,625

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-2640 v2 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i7-9700K versus DDR3-1600 on the Xeon E5-2640 v2 — the Core i7-9700K supports 66.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon E5-2640 v2 supports up to 768 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 500% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i7-9700K) vs 4 (Xeon E5-2640 v2). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-9700K) vs 40 (Xeon E5-2640 v2) — the Xeon E5-2640 v2 offers 24 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel 300 series (Core i7-9700K) and Intel X79,Intel C602 (Xeon E5-2640 v2).

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E5-2640 v2
Socket	LGA1151	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666+67%	DDR3-1600
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	768 GB+500%
RAM Channels	2	4+100%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	40+150%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-9700K) / not specified (Xeon E5-2640 v2). The Core i7-9700K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the Xeon E5-2640 v2 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E5-2640 v2
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	UHD Graphics 630	—
Unlocked	Yes	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	—
Target Use	Desktop	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i7-9700K was priced at $385, while the Xeon E5-2640 v2 came in at $4115. On launch pricing ($385 vs $4115), Core i7-9700K was $3730 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-9700K delivers 37.4 pts/$ vs 1.9 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2640 v2 — making the Core i7-9700K the 181.1% better value option.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E5-2640 v2
MSRP	$385-91%	$4115
Performance per Dollar	37.4+1868%	1.9
Release Date	2018	2013

Search Core i7-9700K on Amazon

Search Xeon E5-2640 v2 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.