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.

Core i9-13950HX vs Xeon 6515P FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i9-13950HX vs Xeon 6515P: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i9-13950HX

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +28.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $150 less on MSRP ($590 MSRP vs $740 MSRP).
✅Delivers 26.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 69.5 vs 55.0 PassMark/$ ($590 MSRP vs $740 MSRP).
✅Draws 55W instead of 150W, a 95W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel UHD Graphics, while Xeon 6515P needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (36 MB vs 72 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon 6515P, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 88 PCIe lanes.

Xeon 6515P

2025

Why buy it

✅+100% larger total L3 cache (72 MB vs 36 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 88 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅340% more PCIe lanes (88 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-13950HX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (40,720 vs 41,012).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 55.0 vs 69.5 PassMark/$ ($740 MSRP vs $590 MSRP).
❌172.7% higher power demand at 150W vs 55W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i9-13950HX can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i9-13950HX better than Xeon 6515P?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon 6515P makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i9-13950HX is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i9-13950HX is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 28.8% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i9-13950HX is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 24 cores and 32 threads.

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

Core i9-13950HX is the better buy right now. Core i9-13950HX comes in $150 cheaper on MSRP at $590 MSRP versus $740 MSRP, and it still gives you a 28.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 26.3% better value on MSRP (69.5 vs 55.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Xeon 6515P makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2023) and 100% larger total L3 cache (72 MB vs 36 MB). That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Core i9-13950HX vs Xeon 6515P Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i9-13950HX

The Core i9-13950HX is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 January 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-HX (2023) architecture. It features 24 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 5.5 GHz. L3 cache: 36 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1964. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 41,012 points. Launch price was $590.

Xeon 6515P

The Xeon 6515P is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 February 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Granite Rapids (2024−2025) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 2.3 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 72 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4710. Thermal design power (TDP): 150 Watt. Memory support: DDR5(6400MT/s). Passmark benchmark score: 40,720 points. Launch price was $740.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i9-13950HX packs 24 cores / 32 threads, while the Xeon 6515P offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Core i9-13950HX has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.5 GHz on the Core i9-13950HX versus 3.8 GHz on the Xeon 6515P — a 36.6% clock advantage for the Core i9-13950HX (base: 2.2 GHz vs 2.3 GHz). The Core i9-13950HX uses the Raptor Lake-HX (2023) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Xeon 6515P uses Granite Rapids (2024−2025) (Intel 3 nm). In PassMark, the Core i9-13950HX scores 41,012 against the Xeon 6515P's 40,720 — a 0.7% lead for the Core i9-13950HX. L3 cache: 36 MB (total) on the Core i9-13950HX vs 72 MB (total) on the Xeon 6515P.

Feature	Core i9-13950HX	Xeon 6515P
Cores / Threads	24 / 32+50%	16 / 32
Boost Clock	5.5 GHz+45%	3.8 GHz
Base Clock	2.2 GHz	2.3 GHz+5%
L3 Cache	36 MB (total)	72 MB (total)+100%
L2 Cache	2 MB (per core)	2 MB (per core)
Process	Intel 7 nm	Intel 3 nm-57%
Architecture	Raptor Lake-HX (2023)	Granite Rapids (2024−2025)
PassMark	41,012	40,720

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i9-13950HX uses the FCBGA1964 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon 6515P uses LGA4710 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 5600 on the Core i9-13950HX versus 6400 on the Xeon 6515P — the Xeon 6515P supports 14.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon 6515P supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 192 — 2033.3% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i9-13950HX) vs 8 (Xeon 6515P). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i9-13950HX) vs 88 (Xeon 6515P) — the Xeon 6515P offers 68 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Raptor Lake-HX (Core i9-13950HX) and LGA4710 (Xeon 6515P).

Feature	Core i9-13950HX	Xeon 6515P
Socket	FCBGA1964	LGA4710
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	5600	6400+14%
Max RAM Capacity	192	4096+2033%
RAM Channels	2	8+300%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	88+340%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core i9-13950HX has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core i9-13950HX includes integrated graphics (Intel UHD Graphics), while the Xeon 6515P requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Core i9-13950HX rivals M3 Max 16-Core; Xeon 6515P rivals EPYC 9534.

Feature	Core i9-13950HX	Xeon 6515P
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Intel UHD Graphics	None
Unlocked	Yes	No
AVX-512	Yes	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i9-13950HX was priced at $590, while the Xeon 6515P came in at $740. On launch pricing ($590 vs $740), Core i9-13950HX was $150 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i9-13950HX delivers 69.5 pts/$ vs 55.0 pts/$ for the Xeon 6515P — making the Core i9-13950HX the 23.3% better value option.

Feature	Core i9-13950HX	Xeon 6515P
MSRP	$590-20%	$740
Performance per Dollar	69.5+26%	55.0
Release Date	2023	2025

Search Core i9-13950HX on Amazon

Search Xeon 6515P on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.