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

2018

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +23.7% higher average FPS across 12 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 95W instead of 130W, a 35W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon E5-2667 v2 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 20 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2667 v2, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 37.4 vs 40.6 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $300 MSRP).

Xeon E5-2667 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.
✅Costs $85 less on MSRP ($300 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
✅Delivers 8.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 40.6 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($300 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
✅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 12 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (12,186 vs 14,397).
❌36.8% higher power demand at 130W vs 95W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i7-9700K

2018

Xeon E5-2667 v2

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +23.7% higher average FPS across 12 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 95W instead of 130W, a 35W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon E5-2667 v2 needs a discrete GPU.

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.
✅Costs $85 less on MSRP ($300 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
✅Delivers 8.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 40.6 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($300 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
✅150% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 20 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2667 v2, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 37.4 vs 40.6 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $300 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 12 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (12,186 vs 14,397).
❌36.8% higher power demand at 130W vs 95W.
❌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 E5-2667 v2?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon E5-2667 v2 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-9700K is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i7-9700K is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 23.7% more average FPS across 12 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 better fit. You are getting 18.1% 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 still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon E5-2667 v2 makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core i7-9700K is 28.3% more expensive on MSRP at $385 MSRP versus $300 MSRP, and it gives you a 23.7% average FPS lead across 12 shared CPU game tests in our data. Xeon E5-2667 v2 is also 8.6% better value on MSRP (40.6 vs 37.4 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

Core i7-9700K is the more future-proof choice 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 should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

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.

Core i7-9700K Benchmark Check

Xeon E5-2667 v2 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E5-2667 v2
1080p
low	308 FPS	170 FPS
medium	278 FPS	145 FPS
high	231 FPS	118 FPS
ultra	182 FPS	95 FPS
1440p
low	270 FPS	145 FPS
medium	221 FPS	120 FPS
high	178 FPS	95 FPS
ultra	143 FPS	77 FPS
4K
low	170 FPS	66 FPS
medium	140 FPS	59 FPS
high	108 FPS	46 FPS
ultra	95 FPS	36 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon E5-2667 v2

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E5-2667 v2
1080p
low	360 FPS	305 FPS
medium	321 FPS	305 FPS
high	291 FPS	276 FPS
ultra	259 FPS	232 FPS
1440p
low	324 FPS	305 FPS
medium	282 FPS	288 FPS
high	258 FPS	245 FPS
ultra	225 FPS	203 FPS
4K
low	249 FPS	204 FPS
medium	221 FPS	187 FPS
high	208 FPS	169 FPS
ultra	179 FPS	139 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon E5-2667 v2

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E5-2667 v2
1080p
low	360 FPS	305 FPS
medium	360 FPS	305 FPS
high	360 FPS	305 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	305 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	305 FPS
medium	360 FPS	305 FPS
high	360 FPS	305 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	305 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	305 FPS
medium	360 FPS	305 FPS
high	360 FPS	305 FPS
ultra	318 FPS	305 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon E5-2667 v2

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E5-2667 v2
1080p
low	360 FPS	305 FPS
medium	360 FPS	305 FPS
high	360 FPS	305 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	305 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	305 FPS
medium	360 FPS	305 FPS
high	360 FPS	305 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	305 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	305 FPS
medium	360 FPS	305 FPS
high	360 FPS	305 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	305 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon E5-2667 v2

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and Xeon E5-2667 v2

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 E5-2667 v2

The Xeon E5-2667 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 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 20 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 12,186 points. Launch price was $2,300.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, matching the Xeon E5-2667 v2's 8 cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 4 GHz on the Xeon E5-2667 v2 — a 20.2% clock advantage for the Core i7-9700K (base: 3.6 GHz vs 3.3 GHz). The Core i7-9700K uses the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E5-2667 v2 uses Ivy Bridge-EP (2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the Xeon E5-2667 v2's 12,186 — a 16.6% lead for the Core i7-9700K. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 20 MB (total) on the Xeon E5-2667 v2.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E5-2667 v2
Cores / Threads	8 / 8	8 / 16
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz+23%	4 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+9%	3.3 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+18%	12,186

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-2667 v2 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i7-9700K versus DDR3-1866 on the Xeon E5-2667 v2 — the Core i7-9700K supports 28.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon E5-2667 v2 supports up to 768 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 142.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i7-9700K) vs 4 (Xeon E5-2667 v2). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-9700K) vs 40 (Xeon E5-2667 v2) — the Xeon E5-2667 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 E5-2667 v2).

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E5-2667 v2
Socket	LGA1151	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666+33%	DDR3-1866
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 E5-2667 v2). The Core i7-9700K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the Xeon E5-2667 v2 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E5-2667 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

The Core i7-9700K launched at $385 MSRP, while the Xeon E5-2667 v2 debuted at $300. On MSRP ($385 vs $300), the Xeon E5-2667 v2 is $85 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-9700K delivers 37.4 pts/$ vs 40.6 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2667 v2 — making the Xeon E5-2667 v2 the 8.3% better value option.