
Core i7-9700K
Popular choices:

Xeon Gold 6238R
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: +7.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $2,227 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $2,612 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 181.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.4 vs 13.3 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $2,612 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 95W instead of 165W, a 70W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon Gold 6238R needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 34,751).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 39 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon Gold 6238R, which brings 28 cores / 56 threads and 48 PCIe lanes.
Xeon Gold 6238R
2020Why buy it
- ✅+141.4% higher PassMark.
- ✅+220.8% larger total L3 cache (39 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 28 cores / 56 threads, plus 48 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅200% more PCIe lanes (48 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 13.3 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($2,612 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
- ❌73.7% higher power demand at 165W vs 95W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core i7-9700K
2018Xeon Gold 6238R
2020Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +7.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $2,227 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $2,612 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 181.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.4 vs 13.3 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $2,612 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 95W instead of 165W, a 70W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon Gold 6238R needs a discrete GPU.
Why buy it
- ✅+141.4% higher PassMark.
- ✅+220.8% larger total L3 cache (39 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 28 cores / 56 threads, plus 48 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅200% more PCIe lanes (48 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 34,751).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 39 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon Gold 6238R, which brings 28 cores / 56 threads and 48 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-9700K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 13.3 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($2,612 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
- ❌73.7% higher power demand at 165W vs 95W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is Xeon Gold 6238R better than Core i7-9700K?
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 Gold 6238R |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 308 FPS | 196 FPS |
| medium | 278 FPS | 158 FPS |
| high | 231 FPS | 128 FPS |
| ultra | 182 FPS | 100 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 270 FPS | 157 FPS |
| medium | 221 FPS | 123 FPS |
| high | 178 FPS | 96 FPS |
| ultra | 143 FPS | 76 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 170 FPS | 72 FPS |
| medium | 140 FPS | 60 FPS |
| high | 108 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 95 FPS | 38 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | Xeon Gold 6238R |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 233 FPS |
| medium | 321 FPS | 207 FPS |
| high | 291 FPS | 174 FPS |
| ultra | 259 FPS | 145 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 324 FPS | 200 FPS |
| medium | 282 FPS | 180 FPS |
| high | 258 FPS | 153 FPS |
| ultra | 225 FPS | 123 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 249 FPS | 125 FPS |
| medium | 221 FPS | 114 FPS |
| high | 208 FPS | 104 FPS |
| ultra | 179 FPS | 86 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | Xeon Gold 6238R |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 869 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 869 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 833 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 753 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 761 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 676 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 635 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 569 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 492 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 406 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 357 FPS |
| ultra | 318 FPS | 292 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i7-9700K | Xeon Gold 6238R |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 869 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 816 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 703 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 613 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 716 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 628 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 539 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 466 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 360 FPS | 521 FPS |
| medium | 360 FPS | 465 FPS |
| high | 360 FPS | 408 FPS |
| ultra | 360 FPS | 351 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and Xeon Gold 6238R

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 Gold 6238R
Xeon Gold 6238R
The Xeon Gold 6238R is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 February 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Cascade Lake (2019−2020) architecture. It features 28 cores and 56 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 38.5 MB. L2 cache: 28 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 165 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 34,751 points. Launch price was $2,612.
Processing Power
The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon Gold 6238R offers 28 cores / 56 threads — the Xeon Gold 6238R has 20 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 4 GHz on the Xeon Gold 6238R — a 20.2% 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 Gold 6238R uses Cascade Lake (2019−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the Xeon Gold 6238R's 34,751 — a 82.8% lead for the Xeon Gold 6238R. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 38.5 MB on the Xeon Gold 6238R.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | Xeon Gold 6238R |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 8 / 8 | 28 / 56+250% |
| Boost Clock | 4.9 GHz+23% | 4 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.6 GHz+64% | 2.2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 38.5 MB+221% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 28 MB+11100% |
| Process | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Architecture | Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) | Cascade Lake (2019−2020) |
| PassMark | 14,397 | 34,751+141% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 21,433 |
Memory & Platform
The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon Gold 6238R uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-2666 memory speed. The Core i7-9700K supports up to 128 GB of RAM compared to 1 TB — 196.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i7-9700K) vs 6 (Xeon Gold 6238R). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-9700K) vs 48 (Xeon Gold 6238R) — the Xeon Gold 6238R offers 32 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel 300 series (Core i7-9700K) and C621,C622,C624,C627,C628 (Xeon Gold 6238R).
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | Xeon Gold 6238R |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1151 | LGA3647 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | DDR4-2933 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | 1 TB+700% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 6+200% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 48+200% |
Advanced Features
Only the Core i7-9700K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Xeon Gold 6238R supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-9700K) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon Gold 6238R). The Core i7-9700K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the Xeon Gold 6238R requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop, Xeon Gold 6238R targets Server. Direct competitor: Xeon Gold 6238R rivals Xeon Gold 6248R.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | Xeon Gold 6238R |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | UHD Graphics 630 | — |
| Unlocked | Yes | No |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d, EPT |
| Target Use | Desktop | Server |
Value Analysis
The Core i7-9700K launched at $385 MSRP, while the Xeon Gold 6238R debuted at $2612. On MSRP ($385 vs $2612), the Core i7-9700K is $2227 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-9700K delivers 37.4 pts/$ vs 13.3 pts/$ for the Xeon Gold 6238R — making the Core i7-9700K the 95% better value option.
| Feature | Core i7-9700K | Xeon Gold 6238R |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $385-85% | $2612 |
| Performance per Dollar | 37.4+181% | 13.3 |
| Release Date | 2018 | 2020 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












