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: +21.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 95W instead of 135W, a 40W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon E5-4667 v3 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 15,397).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 40 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-4667 v3, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 37.4 vs 120.3 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $128 MSRP).

Xeon E5-4667 v3

2015

Why buy it

✅+6.9% higher PassMark.
✅+233.3% larger total L3 cache (40 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads.
✅Costs $257 less on MSRP ($128 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
✅Delivers 221.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 120.3 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($128 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌42.1% higher power demand at 135W vs 95W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i7-9700K

2018

Xeon E5-4667 v3

2015

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +21.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 95W instead of 135W, a 40W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon E5-4667 v3 needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅+6.9% higher PassMark.
✅+233.3% larger total L3 cache (40 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads.
✅Costs $257 less on MSRP ($128 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
✅Delivers 221.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 120.3 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($128 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 15,397).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 40 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-4667 v3, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 37.4 vs 120.3 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $128 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌42.1% higher power demand at 135W 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 E5-4667 v3?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon E5-4667 v3 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 streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E5-4667 v3 is the better fit. You are getting 6.9% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 233.3% larger total L3 cache (40 MB vs 12 MB).

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

Core i7-9700K is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon E5-4667 v3 makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core i7-9700K is 200.8% more expensive on MSRP at $385 MSRP versus $128 MSRP, and it gives you a 21.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Xeon E5-4667 v3 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 6.9% better PassMark. Xeon E5-4667 v3 is also 221.7% better value on MSRP (120.3 vs 37.4 PassMark/$), 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 2015). That makes it the safer long-term pick.

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 E5-4667 v3 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E5-4667 v3
1080p
low	308 FPS	175 FPS
medium	278 FPS	151 FPS
high	231 FPS	119 FPS
ultra	182 FPS	96 FPS
1440p
low	270 FPS	147 FPS
medium	221 FPS	123 FPS
high	178 FPS	94 FPS
ultra	143 FPS	76 FPS
4K
low	170 FPS	68 FPS
medium	140 FPS	61 FPS
high	108 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	95 FPS	38 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon E5-4667 v3

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E5-4667 v3
1080p
low	360 FPS	212 FPS
medium	321 FPS	193 FPS
high	291 FPS	164 FPS
ultra	259 FPS	132 FPS
1440p
low	324 FPS	183 FPS
medium	282 FPS	166 FPS
high	258 FPS	143 FPS
ultra	225 FPS	112 FPS
4K
low	249 FPS	115 FPS
medium	221 FPS	106 FPS
high	208 FPS	94 FPS
ultra	179 FPS	74 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon E5-4667 v3

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E5-4667 v3
1080p
low	360 FPS	385 FPS
medium	360 FPS	385 FPS
high	360 FPS	385 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	385 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	385 FPS
medium	360 FPS	385 FPS
high	360 FPS	385 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	385 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	385 FPS
medium	360 FPS	359 FPS
high	360 FPS	324 FPS
ultra	318 FPS	270 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon E5-4667 v3

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E5-4667 v3
1080p
low	360 FPS	385 FPS
medium	360 FPS	385 FPS
high	360 FPS	385 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	385 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	385 FPS
medium	360 FPS	385 FPS
high	360 FPS	385 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	385 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	385 FPS
medium	360 FPS	385 FPS
high	360 FPS	385 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	358 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon E5-4667 v3

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and Xeon E5-4667 v3

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 E5-4667 v3

The Xeon E5-4667 v3 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Haswell-EP (2014−2015) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L3 cache: 40 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 135 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 15,397 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-4667 v3 offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Xeon E5-4667 v3 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 2.9 GHz on the Xeon E5-4667 v3 — a 51.3% 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 E5-4667 v3 uses Haswell-EP (2014−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the Xeon E5-4667 v3's 15,397 — a 6.7% lead for the Xeon E5-4667 v3. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 40 MB (total) on the Xeon E5-4667 v3.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E5-4667 v3
Cores / Threads	8 / 8	16 / 32+100%
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz+69%	2.9 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+80%	2 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	40 MB (total)+233%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256K (per core)
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019)	Haswell-EP (2014−2015)
PassMark	14,397	15,397+7%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-4667 v3 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E5-4667 v3
Socket	LGA1151	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
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 E5-4667 v3). The Core i7-9700K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the Xeon E5-4667 v3 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E5-4667 v3
Integrated GPU	Yes	—
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 E5-4667 v3 debuted at $128. On MSRP ($385 vs $128), the Xeon E5-4667 v3 is $257 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-9700K delivers 37.4 pts/$ vs 120.3 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-4667 v3 — making the Xeon E5-4667 v3 the 105.1% better value option.