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 $1,045 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $1,430 MSRP).
✅Delivers 36.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.4 vs 27.5 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $1,430 MSRP).
✅Draws 95W instead of 250W, a 155W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon W-3335 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3335 across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 39,293).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 24 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3335, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Xeon W-3335

2021

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +41.8% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 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 27.5 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($1,430 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
❌163.2% higher power demand at 250W vs 95W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i7-9700K

2018

Xeon W-3335

2021

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,045 less on MSRP ($385 MSRP vs $1,430 MSRP).
✅Delivers 36.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 37.4 vs 27.5 PassMark/$ ($385 MSRP vs $1,430 MSRP).
✅Draws 95W instead of 250W, a 155W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon W-3335 needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +41.8% higher average FPS across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 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-3335 across 6 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (14,397 vs 39,293).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 24 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3335, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 27.5 vs 37.4 PassMark/$ ($1,430 MSRP vs $385 MSRP).
❌163.2% higher power demand at 250W vs 95W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-9700K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon W-3335 better than Core i7-9700K?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon W-3335 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-3335 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 41.8% more average FPS across 6 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon W-3335 is the better fit. You are getting 172.9% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 12 MB).

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

Xeon W-3335 is the smarter buy by a wide margin for a fresh build. Xeon W-3335 is 271.4% more expensive on MSRP at $1,430 MSRP versus $385 MSRP, and it gives you a 41.8% average FPS lead across 6 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i7-9700K only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that is mostly used-market pricing on an obsolete 2018 platform. Even with 36.1% better value on paper (37.4 vs 27.5 PassMark/$), 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-3335 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2021 vs 2018), 100% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 12 MB), more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 32 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-3335 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3335
1080p
low	308 FPS	182 FPS
medium	278 FPS	144 FPS
high	231 FPS	118 FPS
ultra	182 FPS	92 FPS
1440p
low	270 FPS	148 FPS
medium	221 FPS	115 FPS
high	178 FPS	93 FPS
ultra	143 FPS	72 FPS
4K
low	170 FPS	68 FPS
medium	140 FPS	57 FPS
high	108 FPS	45 FPS
ultra	95 FPS	36 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon W-3335

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3335
1080p
low	360 FPS	447 FPS
medium	321 FPS	385 FPS
high	291 FPS	316 FPS
ultra	259 FPS	266 FPS
1440p
low	324 FPS	385 FPS
medium	282 FPS	342 FPS
high	258 FPS	287 FPS
ultra	225 FPS	237 FPS
4K
low	249 FPS	248 FPS
medium	221 FPS	223 FPS
high	208 FPS	199 FPS
ultra	179 FPS	165 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon W-3335

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3335
1080p
low	360 FPS	982 FPS
medium	360 FPS	962 FPS
high	360 FPS	905 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	819 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	836 FPS
medium	360 FPS	736 FPS
high	360 FPS	692 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	618 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	537 FPS
medium	360 FPS	438 FPS
high	360 FPS	386 FPS
ultra	318 FPS	315 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon W-3335

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3335
1080p
low	360 FPS	982 FPS
medium	360 FPS	868 FPS
high	360 FPS	751 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	639 FPS
1440p
low	360 FPS	790 FPS
medium	360 FPS	676 FPS
high	360 FPS	582 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	496 FPS
4K
low	360 FPS	550 FPS
medium	360 FPS	480 FPS
high	360 FPS	429 FPS
ultra	360 FPS	363 FPS

Open Core i7-9700K Open Xeon W-3335

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-9700K and Xeon W-3335

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-3335

The Xeon W-3335 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Ice Lake-W (2021) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 24 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4189. Thermal design power (TDP): 250 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 39,293 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-9700K packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon W-3335 offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Xeon W-3335 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i7-9700K versus 4 GHz on the Xeon W-3335 — a 20.2% clock advantage for the Core i7-9700K (base: 3.6 GHz vs 3.4 GHz). The Core i7-9700K uses the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon W-3335 uses Ice Lake-W (2021) (10 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-9700K scores 14,397 against the Xeon W-3335's 39,293 — a 92.7% lead for the Xeon W-3335. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i7-9700K vs 24 MB (total) on the Xeon W-3335.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3335
Cores / Threads	8 / 8	16 / 32+100%
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz+23%	4 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+6%	3.4 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	24 MB (total)+100%
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	39,293+173%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-9700K uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon W-3335 uses LGA4189 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i7-9700K versus 3200 on the Xeon W-3335 — the Xeon W-3335 supports 199.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon W-3335 supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 128 GB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i7-9700K) vs 8 (Xeon W-3335). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-9700K) vs 64 (Xeon W-3335) — the Xeon W-3335 offers 48 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel 300 series (Core i7-9700K) and W790 (Xeon W-3335).

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3335
Socket	LGA1151	LGA4189
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	3200+79900%
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB+3276700%	4096
RAM Channels	2	8+300%
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-3335 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-3335 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-9700K targets Desktop. Direct competitor: Xeon W-3335 rivals EPYC 7402.

Feature	Core i7-9700K	Xeon W-3335
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-3335 debuted at $1430. On MSRP ($385 vs $1430), the Core i7-9700K is $1045 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-9700K delivers 37.4 pts/$ vs 27.5 pts/$ for the Xeon W-3335 — making the Core i7-9700K the 30.6% better value option.