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

✅Costs $4,064 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $4,449 MSRP).
✅Delivers 303.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.4 vs 9.3 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $4,449 MSRP).
✅Draws 95W instead of 205W, a 110W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon W-3275 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3275 across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 41,267).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 39 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3275, which brings 28 cores / 56 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Xeon W-3275

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +62.2% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+220.8% larger total L3 cache (39 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 28 cores / 56 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅300% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 9.3 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($4,449 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
❌115.8% higher power demand at 205W vs 95W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i7-9700K

2018

Xeon W-3275

2019

Why buy it

✅Costs $4,064 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $4,449 MSRP).
✅Delivers 303.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.4 vs 9.3 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $4,449 MSRP).
✅Draws 95W instead of 205W, a 110W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon W-3275 needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +62.2% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+220.8% larger total L3 cache (39 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 28 cores / 56 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅300% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3275 across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 41,267).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 39 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3275, which brings 28 cores / 56 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 9.3 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($4,449 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
❌115.8% higher power demand at 205W vs 95W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon W-3275 better than Core i7-9700K?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon W-3275 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, Xeon W-3275 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 62.2% more average FPS across 2 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon W-3275 is the better fit. You are getting 186.6% better PassMark, backed by 28 cores and 56 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 220.8% larger total L3 cache (39 MB vs 12 MB).

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

Xeon W-3275 is the smarter buy by a wide margin for a fresh build. Xeon W-3275 is 1055.6% more expensive on MSRP at $4,449 MSRP versus $385 MSRP, and it gives you a 62.2% average FPS lead across 2 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i7-9700K only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that is mostly used-market pricing on an obsolete 2018 platform. Even with 303.2% better value on paper (37.4 vs 9.3 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a very cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA1151.

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

Xeon W-3275 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2018), 220.8% larger total L3 cache (39 MB vs 12 MB), more multi-core headroom with 28 cores / 56 threads instead of 8/8, and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. 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 W-3275 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3275
1080p
low	308 FPS	198 FPS
medium	278 FPS	162 FPS
high	231 FPS	132 FPS
ultra	182 FPS	106 FPS
1440p
low	270 FPS	159 FPS
medium	221 FPS	125 FPS
high	178 FPS	100 FPS
ultra	143 FPS	83 FPS
4K
low	170 FPS	87 FPS
medium	140 FPS	74 FPS
high	108 FPS	58 FPS
ultra	95 FPS	47 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon W-3275

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3275
1080p
low	360 FPS	607 FPS
medium	321 FPS	522 FPS
high	291 FPS	420 FPS
ultra	259 FPS	371 FPS
1440p
low	324 FPS	514 FPS
medium	282 FPS	447 FPS
high	258 FPS	370 FPS
ultra	225 FPS	306 FPS
4K
low	249 FPS	306 FPS
medium	221 FPS	266 FPS
high	208 FPS	243 FPS
ultra	179 FPS	213 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon W-3275

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3275
1080p
low	360 FPS	1025 FPS
medium	360 FPS	928 FPS
high	360 FPS	876 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	793 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	808 FPS
medium	360 FPS	715 FPS
high	360 FPS	675 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	605 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	519 FPS
medium	360 FPS	429 FPS
high	360 FPS	387 FPS
ultra	318 FPS	315 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon W-3275

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3275
1080p
low	360 FPS	1032 FPS
medium	360 FPS	1014 FPS
high	360 FPS	885 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	773 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	932 FPS
medium	360 FPS	804 FPS
high	360 FPS	702 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	603 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	680 FPS
medium	360 FPS	591 FPS
high	360 FPS	521 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	437 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon W-3275

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and Xeon W-3275

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 W-3275

The Xeon W-3275 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 June 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Cascade Lake (2019−2020) architecture. It features 28 cores and 56 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.6 GHz. L3 cache: 38.5 MB. L2 cache: 28 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 205 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 41,267 points. Launch price was $4,449.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon W-3275 offers 28 cores / 56 threads — the Xeon W-3275 has 20 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 4.6 GHz on the Xeon W-3275 — a 6.3% clock advantage for the Core i7-9700K (base: 3.6 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The Core i7-9700K uses the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon W-3275 uses Cascade Lake (2019−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the Xeon W-3275's 41,267 — a 96.5% lead for the Xeon W-3275. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 38.5 MB on the Xeon W-3275.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3275
Cores / Threads	8 / 8	28 / 56+250%
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz+7%	4.6 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+44%	2.5 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	41,267+187%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon W-3275 uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i7-9700K versus 3200 on the Xeon W-3275 — the Xeon W-3275 supports 199.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon W-3275 supports up to 1024 of RAM compared to 128 GB — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i7-9700K) vs 6 (Xeon W-3275). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-9700K) vs 64 (Xeon W-3275) — the Xeon W-3275 offers 48 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel 300 series (Core i7-9700K) and C621 (Xeon W-3275).

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3275
Socket	LGA1151	LGA3647
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	3200+79900%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB+13107100%	1024
RAM Channels	2	6+200%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	64+300%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core i7-9700K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Xeon W-3275 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core i7-9700K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the Xeon W-3275 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop. Direct competitor: Xeon W-3275 rivals Threadripper 3970X.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3275
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	UHD Graphics 630	None
Unlocked	Yes	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
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 W-3275 debuted at $4449. On MSRP ($385 vs $4449), the Core i7-9700K is $4064 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-9700K delivers 37.4 pts/$ vs 9.3 pts/$ for the Xeon W-3275 — making the Core i7-9700K the 120.5% better value option.