
Core i7-9700K
Popular choices:

Xeon E5-2640 v4
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
About PassMark
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.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.
Core i7-9700K
2018Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +29.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon E5-2640 v4 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 25 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2640 v4, which brings 10 cores / 20 threads.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $385 MSRP, while Xeon E5-2640 v4 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Xeon E5-2640 v4
2016Why buy it
- ✅+108.3% larger total L3 cache (25 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 10 cores / 20 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (12,470 vs 14,397).
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core i7-9700K
2018Xeon E5-2640 v4
2016Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +29.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon E5-2640 v4 needs a discrete GPU.
Why buy it
- ✅+108.3% larger total L3 cache (25 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 10 cores / 20 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 25 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2640 v4, which brings 10 cores / 20 threads.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $385 MSRP, while Xeon E5-2640 v4 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (12,470 vs 14,397).
- ❌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 v4?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | Xeon E5-2640 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 308 FPS | 160 FPS |
| medium | 278 FPS | 140 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 113 FPS |
| ultra | 182 FPS | 93 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 270 FPS | 135 FPS |
| medium | 221 FPS | 115 FPS |
| high | 178 FPS | 89 FPS |
| ultra | 143 FPS | 73 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 170 FPS | 63 FPS |
| medium | 140 FPS | 57 FPS |
| high | 108 FPS | 44 FPS |
| ultra | 95 FPS | 35 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | Xeon E5-2640 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| medium | 321 FPS | 290 FPS |
| high | 291 FPS | 253 FPS |
| ultra | 259 FPS | 208 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 324 FPS | 278 FPS |
| medium | 282 FPS | 254 FPS |
| high | 258 FPS | 222 FPS |
| ultra | 225 FPS | 181 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 249 FPS | 180 FPS |
| medium | 221 FPS | 164 FPS |
| high | 208 FPS | 144 FPS |
| ultra | 179 FPS | 114 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | Xeon E5-2640 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| ultra | 318 FPS | 279 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | Xeon E5-2640 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 312 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and Xeon E5-2640 v4

Core i7-9700K
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 v4
Xeon E5-2640 v4
The Xeon E5-2640 v4 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 June 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture. It features 10 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 25 MB. L2 cache: 2.5 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 90 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133. Passmark benchmark score: 12,470 points. Launch price was $939.
Processing Power
The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-2640 v4 offers 10 cores / 20 threads — the Xeon E5-2640 v4 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 3.4 GHz on the Xeon E5-2640 v4 — a 36.1% clock advantage for the Core i7-9700K (base: 3.6 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Core i7-9700K uses the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E5-2640 v4 uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the Xeon E5-2640 v4's 12,470 — a 14.3% lead for the Core i7-9700K. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 25 MB on the Xeon E5-2640 v4.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | Xeon E5-2640 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 8 / 8 | 10 / 20+25% |
| Boost Clock | 4.9 GHz+44% | 3.4 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.6 GHz+50% | 2.4 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 25 MB+108% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 2.5 MB+900% |
| Process | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Architecture | Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) | Broadwell (2015−2019) |
| PassMark | 14,397+15% | 12,470 |
Memory & Platform
The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-2640 v4 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | Xeon E5-2640 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1151 | LGA2011 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 5.0+67% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-9700K) / not specified (Xeon E5-2640 v4). The Core i7-9700K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the Xeon E5-2640 v4 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | Xeon E5-2640 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | — |
| IGPU Model | UHD Graphics 630 | — |
| Unlocked | Yes | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | — |
| Target Use | Desktop | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












