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: +4.7% higher average FPS across 29 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 95W instead of 155W, a 60W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon E7-4890 v2 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 30,946).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 38 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E7-4890 v2, which brings 15 cores / 30 threads and 32 PCIe lanes.
❌Launch MSRP is still $385 MSRP, while Xeon E7-4890 v2 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Xeon E7-4890 v2

2014

Why buy it

✅+114.9% higher PassMark.
✅+212.5% larger total L3 cache (38 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 15 cores / 30 threads, plus 32 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅100% more PCIe lanes (32 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 29 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌63.2% higher power demand at 155W vs 95W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i7-9700K

2018

Xeon E7-4890 v2

2014

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.7% higher average FPS across 29 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 95W instead of 155W, a 60W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon E7-4890 v2 needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅+114.9% higher PassMark.
✅+212.5% larger total L3 cache (38 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 15 cores / 30 threads, plus 32 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅100% more PCIe lanes (32 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 30,946).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 38 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E7-4890 v2, which brings 15 cores / 30 threads and 32 PCIe lanes.
❌Launch MSRP is still $385 MSRP, while Xeon E7-4890 v2 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 29 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌63.2% higher power demand at 155W 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 E7-4890 v2?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon E7-4890 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 streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E7-4890 v2 is the better fit. You are getting 114.9% better PassMark, backed by 15 cores and 30 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 212.5% larger total L3 cache (38 MB vs 12 MB).

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

Core i7-9700K is the smarter buy today. Core i7-9700K is at an unclear MSRP at $385 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you a 4.7% average FPS lead across 29 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Xeon E7-4890 v2 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 114.9% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (37.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play 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 2014). 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 E7-4890 v2 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E7-4890 v2
1080p
low	308 FPS	186 FPS
medium	278 FPS	148 FPS
high	231 FPS	118 FPS
ultra	182 FPS	92 FPS
1440p
low	270 FPS	153 FPS
medium	221 FPS	119 FPS
high	178 FPS	92 FPS
ultra	143 FPS	73 FPS
4K
low	170 FPS	72 FPS
medium	140 FPS	59 FPS
high	108 FPS	46 FPS
ultra	95 FPS	38 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon E7-4890 v2

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E7-4890 v2
1080p
low	360 FPS	368 FPS
medium	321 FPS	324 FPS
high	291 FPS	270 FPS
ultra	259 FPS	216 FPS
1440p
low	324 FPS	318 FPS
medium	282 FPS	282 FPS
high	258 FPS	238 FPS
ultra	225 FPS	184 FPS
4K
low	249 FPS	199 FPS
medium	221 FPS	178 FPS
high	208 FPS	152 FPS
ultra	179 FPS	121 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon E7-4890 v2

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E7-4890 v2
1080p
low	360 FPS	774 FPS
medium	360 FPS	774 FPS
high	360 FPS	763 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	679 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	744 FPS
medium	360 FPS	638 FPS
high	360 FPS	605 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	537 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	479 FPS
medium	360 FPS	376 FPS
high	360 FPS	335 FPS
ultra	318 FPS	274 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon E7-4890 v2

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E7-4890 v2
1080p
low	360 FPS	774 FPS
medium	360 FPS	774 FPS
high	360 FPS	765 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	648 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	774 FPS
medium	360 FPS	686 FPS
high	360 FPS	586 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	493 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	581 FPS
medium	360 FPS	506 FPS
high	360 FPS	442 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	377 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon E7-4890 v2

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and Xeon E7-4890 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 E7-4890 v2

The Xeon E7-4890 v2 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It features 15 cores and 30 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 37.5 MB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 155 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333, DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 30,946 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E7-4890 v2 offers 15 cores / 30 threads — the Xeon E7-4890 v2 has 7 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 3.4 GHz on the Xeon E7-4890 v2 — a 36.1% clock advantage for the Core i7-9700K (base: 3.6 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The Core i7-9700K is built on the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture. In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the Xeon E7-4890 v2's 30,946 — a 73% lead for the Xeon E7-4890 v2. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 37.5 MB on the Xeon E7-4890 v2.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E7-4890 v2
Cores / Threads	8 / 8	15 / 30+88%
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz+44%	3.4 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+29%	2.8 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	37.5 MB+213%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	—
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019)	—
PassMark	14,397	30,946+115%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	6,500
Geekbench 6 Single	—	730
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	5,500

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E7-4890 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 DDR3-1600 on the Xeon E7-4890 v2 — the Core i7-9700K supports 28.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon E7-4890 v2 supports up to 1536 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 169.2% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i7-9700K) vs 4 (Xeon E7-4890 v2). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-9700K) vs 32 (Xeon E7-4890 v2) — the Xeon E7-4890 v2 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel 300 series (Core i7-9700K) and C602 (Xeon E7-4890 v2).

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E7-4890 v2
Socket	LGA1151	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666+33%	DDR3-1600
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	1536 GB+1100%
RAM Channels	2	4+100%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	32+100%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core i7-9700K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-9700K) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon E7-4890 v2). The Core i7-9700K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the Xeon E7-4890 v2 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop, Xeon E7-4890 v2 targets Enterprise Server (Legacy). Direct competitor: Xeon E7-4890 v2 rivals Xeon E5-2697 v2.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon E7-4890 v2
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	UHD Graphics 630	—
Unlocked	Yes	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	Desktop	Enterprise Server (Legacy)