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 $564 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $949 MSRP).
✅Delivers 27.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.4 vs 29.3 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $949 MSRP).
✅Draws 95W instead of 220W, a 125W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon W-3323 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3323 across 5 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 27,822).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 18 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3323, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads.

Xeon W-3323

2021

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +34.1% higher average FPS across 5 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (18 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 29.3 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($949 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
❌131.6% higher power demand at 220W vs 95W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i7-9700K

2018

Xeon W-3323

2021

Why buy it

✅Costs $564 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $949 MSRP).
✅Delivers 27.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.4 vs 29.3 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $949 MSRP).
✅Draws 95W instead of 220W, a 125W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon W-3323 needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +34.1% higher average FPS across 5 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (18 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3323 across 5 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 27,822).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 18 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3323, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 29.3 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($949 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
❌131.6% higher power demand at 220W vs 95W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon W-3323 better than Core i7-9700K?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon W-3323 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-3323 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 34.1% more average FPS across 5 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon W-3323 is the better fit. You are getting 93.2% better PassMark, backed by 12 cores and 24 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (18 MB vs 12 MB).

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

Xeon W-3323 is the smarter buy by a wide margin for a fresh build. Xeon W-3323 is 146.5% more expensive on MSRP at $949 MSRP versus $385 MSRP, and it gives you a 34.1% average FPS lead across 5 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i7-9700K only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that is mostly used-market pricing on an obsolete 2018 platform. Even with 27.6% better value on paper (37.4 vs 29.3 PassMark/$), 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-3323 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2021 vs 2018), 50% larger total L3 cache (18 MB vs 12 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 12 cores / 24 threads instead of 8/8. 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-3323 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3323
1080p
low	308 FPS	176 FPS
medium	278 FPS	140 FPS
high	231 FPS	115 FPS
ultra	182 FPS	92 FPS
1440p
low	270 FPS	146 FPS
medium	221 FPS	114 FPS
high	178 FPS	92 FPS
ultra	143 FPS	73 FPS
4K
low	170 FPS	67 FPS
medium	140 FPS	56 FPS
high	108 FPS	45 FPS
ultra	95 FPS	35 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon W-3323

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3323
1080p
low	360 FPS	447 FPS
medium	321 FPS	385 FPS
high	291 FPS	313 FPS
ultra	259 FPS	264 FPS
1440p
low	324 FPS	384 FPS
medium	282 FPS	342 FPS
high	258 FPS	283 FPS
ultra	225 FPS	234 FPS
4K
low	249 FPS	246 FPS
medium	221 FPS	221 FPS
high	208 FPS	196 FPS
ultra	179 FPS	162 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon W-3323

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3323
1080p
low	360 FPS	696 FPS
medium	360 FPS	696 FPS
high	360 FPS	696 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	693 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	696 FPS
medium	360 FPS	642 FPS
high	360 FPS	608 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	537 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	482 FPS
medium	360 FPS	377 FPS
high	360 FPS	336 FPS
ultra	318 FPS	273 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon W-3323

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3323
1080p
low	360 FPS	696 FPS
medium	360 FPS	696 FPS
high	360 FPS	696 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	602 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	696 FPS
medium	360 FPS	615 FPS
high	360 FPS	533 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	458 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	482 FPS
medium	360 FPS	433 FPS
high	360 FPS	388 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	338 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon W-3323

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and Xeon W-3323

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-3323

The Xeon W-3323 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Ice Lake-W (2021) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 18 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4189. Thermal design power (TDP): 220 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 27,822 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon W-3323 offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the Xeon W-3323 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 3.9 GHz on the Xeon W-3323 — a 22.7% clock advantage for the Core i7-9700K (base: 3.6 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Core i7-9700K uses the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon W-3323 uses Ice Lake-W (2021) (10 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the Xeon W-3323's 27,822 — a 63.6% lead for the Xeon W-3323. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 18 MB (total) on the Xeon W-3323.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3323
Cores / Threads	8 / 8	12 / 24+50%
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz+26%	3.9 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+3%	3.5 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	18 MB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	1 MB (per core)+300%
Process	14 nm	10 nm-29%
Architecture	Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019)	Ice Lake-W (2021)
PassMark	14,397	27,822+93%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon W-3323 uses LGA4189 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3323
Socket	LGA1151	LGA4189
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
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 W-3323). The Core i7-9700K includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the Xeon W-3323 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3323
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 W-3323 debuted at $949. On MSRP ($385 vs $949), the Core i7-9700K is $564 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-9700K delivers 37.4 pts/$ vs 29.3 pts/$ for the Xeon W-3323 — making the Core i7-9700K the 24.2% better value option.