Xeon Gold 6144 vs Xeon Phi 7290

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.

Xeon Gold 6144 vs Xeon Phi 7290 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.

Xeon Gold 6144 vs Xeon Phi 7290: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Xeon Gold 6144

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +21.4% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 150W instead of 245W, a 95W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Xeon Phi 7290

2016

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon Gold 6144 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (17,839 vs 18,040).
❌63.3% higher power demand at 245W vs 150W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon Gold 6144 better than Xeon Phi 7290?

Yes. Xeon Gold 6144 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 21.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 1.1% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Xeon Gold 6144 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 21.4% 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, Xeon Gold 6144 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads.

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

Xeon Gold 6144 still makes the most sense overall. Xeon Gold 6144 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 21.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Xeon Gold 6144 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2016) and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 16 threads instead of 72/288. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Xeon Gold 6144 vs Xeon Phi 7290 Technical Specifications

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

Xeon Gold 6144

The Xeon Gold 6144 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 July 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (server) (2017−2018) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L3 cache: 24.75 MB. L2 cache: 8 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 150 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 18,040 points. Launch price was $2,925.

Xeon Phi 7290

The Xeon Phi 7290 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Knights Landing (2016) architecture. It features 72 cores and 288 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 1.7 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 245 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 17,839 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Xeon Gold 6144 packs 8 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon Phi 7290 offers 72 cores / 288 threads — the Xeon Phi 7290 has 64 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.2 GHz on the Xeon Gold 6144 versus 1.7 GHz on the Xeon Phi 7290 — a 84.7% clock advantage for the Xeon Gold 6144 (base: 3.5 GHz vs 1.5 GHz). The Xeon Gold 6144 uses the Skylake (server) (2017−2018) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon Phi 7290 uses Knights Landing (2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Xeon Gold 6144 scores 18,040 against the Xeon Phi 7290's 17,839 — a 1.1% lead for the Xeon Gold 6144. L3 cache: 24.75 MB on the Xeon Gold 6144 vs 0 kB (total) on the Xeon Phi 7290.

Feature	Xeon Gold 6144	Xeon Phi 7290
Cores / Threads	8 / 16	72 / 288+800%
Boost Clock	4.2 GHz+147%	1.7 GHz
Base Clock	3.5 GHz+133%	1.5 GHz
L3 Cache	24.75 MB	0 kB (total)
L2 Cache	8 MB+1500%	512 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Skylake (server) (2017−2018)	Knights Landing (2016)
PassMark	18,040+1%	17,839