Core i9-9820X vs Xeon E5-4667 v4

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 i9-9820X vs Xeon E5-4667 v4 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 i9-9820X vs Xeon E5-4667 v4: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i9-9820X

2018

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (44 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (17 MB vs 45 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-4667 v4, which brings 18 cores / 36 threads.
❌Launch MSRP is still $889 MSRP, while Xeon E5-4667 v4 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌22.2% higher power demand at 165W vs 135W.

Xeon E5-4667 v4

2016

Why buy it

✅+172.7% larger total L3 cache (45 MB vs 17 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 18 cores / 36 threads.
✅Draws 135W instead of 165W, a 30W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (20,319 vs 20,456).
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i9-9820X better than Xeon E5-4667 v4?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-4667 v4 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i9-9820X 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 i9-9820X is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.7% 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 i9-9820X is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 10 cores and 20 threads.

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

Core i9-9820X is the better buy right now. Core i9-9820X comes in at an unclear MSRP at $889 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (23.0 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core i9-9820X makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2018 vs 2016), more multi-core headroom with 10 cores / 20 threads instead of 18/36, and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i9-9820X vs Xeon E5-4667 v4 Technical Specifications

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

Core i9-9820X

The Core i9-9820X is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 19 October 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (server) (2017−2018) architecture. It features 10 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L3 cache: 16.5 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2066. Thermal design power (TDP): 165 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 20,456 points. Launch price was $898.

Xeon E5-4667 v4

The Xeon E5-4667 v4 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 June 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture. It features 18 cores and 36 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 45 MB. L2 cache: 4.5 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 135 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 20,319 points. Launch price was $5,729.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i9-9820X packs 10 cores / 20 threads, while the Xeon E5-4667 v4 offers 18 cores / 36 threads — the Xeon E5-4667 v4 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.2 GHz on the Core i9-9820X versus 3 GHz on the Xeon E5-4667 v4 — a 33.3% clock advantage for the Core i9-9820X (base: 3.3 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The Core i9-9820X uses the Skylake (server) (2017−2018) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E5-4667 v4 uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i9-9820X scores 20,456 against the Xeon E5-4667 v4's 20,319 — a 0.7% lead for the Core i9-9820X. L3 cache: 16.5 MB (total) on the Core i9-9820X vs 45 MB on the Xeon E5-4667 v4.

Feature	Core i9-9820X	Xeon E5-4667 v4
Cores / Threads	10 / 20	18 / 36+80%
Boost Clock	4.2 GHz+40%	3 GHz
Base Clock	3.3 GHz+50%	2.2 GHz
L3 Cache	16.5 MB (total)	45 MB+173%
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	4.5 MB+350%
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Skylake (server) (2017−2018)	Broadwell (2015−2019)
PassMark	20,456	20,319
Geekbench 6 Single	1,394	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	9,361	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i9-9820X uses the LGA2066 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-4667 v4 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i9-9820X	Xeon E5-4667 v4
Socket	LGA2066	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4 2666 MHz	—
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	—
RAM Channels	4	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	44	—