
Core i7-9700K
Popular choices:

Xeon E5-2699 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: +6.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $3,730 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $4,115 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 522.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.4 vs 6.0 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $4,115 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 95W instead of 145W, a 50W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon E5-2699 v4 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 24,711).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 55 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2699 v4, which brings 22 cores / 44 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.
Xeon E5-2699 v4
2016Why buy it
- ✅+71.6% higher PassMark.
- ✅+358.3% larger total L3 cache (55 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 22 cores / 44 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅150% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 6.0 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($4,115 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
- ❌52.6% higher power demand at 145W vs 95W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core i7-9700K
2018Xeon E5-2699 v4
2016Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +6.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $3,730 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $4,115 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 522.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.4 vs 6.0 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $4,115 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 95W instead of 145W, a 50W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon E5-2699 v4 needs a discrete GPU.
Why buy it
- ✅+71.6% higher PassMark.
- ✅+358.3% larger total L3 cache (55 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 22 cores / 44 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅150% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 24,711).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 55 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2699 v4, which brings 22 cores / 44 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 6.0 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($4,115 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
- ❌52.6% higher power demand at 145W 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 E5-2699 v4?
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 E5-2699 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 308 FPS | 187 FPS |
| medium | 278 FPS | 164 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 131 FPS |
| ultra | 182 FPS | 104 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 270 FPS | 154 FPS |
| medium | 221 FPS | 130 FPS |
| high | 178 FPS | 100 FPS |
| ultra | 143 FPS | 81 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 170 FPS | 70 FPS |
| medium | 140 FPS | 62 FPS |
| high | 108 FPS | 48 FPS |
| ultra | 95 FPS | 39 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | Xeon E5-2699 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 211 FPS |
| medium | 321 FPS | 192 FPS |
| high | 291 FPS | 164 FPS |
| ultra | 259 FPS | 132 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 324 FPS | 182 FPS |
| medium | 282 FPS | 165 FPS |
| high | 258 FPS | 143 FPS |
| ultra | 225 FPS | 112 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 249 FPS | 115 FPS |
| medium | 221 FPS | 105 FPS |
| high | 208 FPS | 93 FPS |
| ultra | 179 FPS | 74 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | Xeon E5-2699 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 618 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 618 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 618 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 618 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 618 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 618 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 590 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 532 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 469 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 382 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 347 FPS |
| ultra | 318 FPS | 289 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | Xeon E5-2699 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 618 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 618 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 618 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 614 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 618 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 618 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 572 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 484 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 551 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 493 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 436 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 373 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and Xeon E5-2699 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 E5-2699 v4
Xeon E5-2699 v4
The Xeon E5-2699 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 22 cores and 44 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 55 MB. L2 cache: 5.5 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 145 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 24,711 points. Launch price was $4,115.
Processing Power
The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-2699 v4 offers 22 cores / 44 threads — the Xeon E5-2699 v4 has 14 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 3.6 GHz on the Xeon E5-2699 v4 — a 30.6% clock advantage for the Core i7-9700K (base: 3.6 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The Core i7-9700K uses the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E5-2699 v4 uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the Xeon E5-2699 v4's 24,711 — a 52.7% lead for the Xeon E5-2699 v4. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 55 MB on the Xeon E5-2699 v4.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | Xeon E5-2699 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 8 / 8 | 22 / 44+175% |
| Boost Clock | 4.9 GHz+36% | 3.6 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.6 GHz+64% | 2.2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 55 MB+358% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 5.5 MB+2100% |
| Process | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Architecture | Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) | Broadwell (2015−2019) |
| PassMark | 14,397 | 24,711+72% |
Memory & Platform
The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-2699 v4 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i7-9700K versus 2400 on the Xeon E5-2699 v4 — the Xeon E5-2699 v4 supports 199.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon E5-2699 v4 supports up to 1536 of RAM compared to 128 GB — 169.2% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i7-9700K) vs 4 (Xeon E5-2699 v4). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-9700K) vs 40 (Xeon E5-2699 v4) — the Xeon E5-2699 v4 offers 24 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel 300 series (Core i7-9700K) and C612 (Xeon E5-2699 v4).
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | Xeon E5-2699 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1151 | LGA2011 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | 2400+59900% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB+8738033% | 1536 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 4+100% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 40+150% |
Advanced Features
Only the Core i7-9700K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core i7-9700K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the Xeon E5-2699 v4 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop. Direct competitor: Xeon E5-2699 v4 rivals Xeon Silver 4114.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | Xeon E5-2699 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | UHD Graphics 630 | None |
| Unlocked | Yes | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | Desktop | — |
Value Analysis
The Core i7-9700K launched at $385 MSRP, while the Xeon E5-2699 v4 debuted at $4115. On MSRP ($385 vs $4115), the Core i7-9700K is $3730 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-9700K delivers 37.4 pts/$ vs 6.0 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2699 v4 — making the Core i7-9700K the 144.7% better value option.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | Xeon E5-2699 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $385-91% | $4115 |
| Performance per Dollar | 37.4+523% | 6.0 |
| Release Date | 2018 | 2016 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












