Intel Core i7-9700T vs Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3 and the Intel Core i7-9700T both have 8 cores. The Xeon supports 16 threads via Hyper-Threading, while the Core i7-9700T has 8 threads.

Q: What are the base and boost clock speeds of each processor?

A: The Xeon E5-2640 v3 has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 3.40 GHz. The Core i7-9700T has a base clock of 2000.00 MHz (2.00 GHz) and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Xeon E5-2640 v3 supports ECC memory, while the Core i7-9700T does not.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Core i7-9700T includes UHD Graphics 630. The Xeon E5-2640 v3 has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each CPU?

A: The Xeon E5-2640 v3 has an average benchmark score of 2703, while the Core i7-9700T has an average score of 2668. Both sit at the 50th percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: Which processor wins in single-core Cinebench R23?

A: The Xeon E5-2640 v3 wins with a score of 1319 versus 1175 for the Core i7-9700T, a 12.3% advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations and target different market segments. The Xeon E5-2640 v3 uses the Haswell-EP architecture built on Intel's 22 nm process, with a die size of 356 mm² and 2,600 million transistors. It is a server and workstation part that uses the Intel Socket 2011-3 platform. The Core i7-9700T uses the Coffee Lake architecture on a 14 nm process, with a smaller die size of 180.3 mm², and fits the Intel Socket 1151 platform for desktop systems.

Threading is a major differentiator. The Xeon has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Core i7-9700T has 8 cores and 8 threads. That means the Xeon can process two threads per core, which helps in heavily parallel workloads. The cache hierarchy also differs: both have 64 KB of L1 cache and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, but the Xeon has 20 MB of shared L3 cache versus 12 MB on the Core i7-9700T.

Memory architecture is another clear split. The Xeon supports quad-channel DDR4 memory with a peak bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, while the Core i7-9700T uses dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s. The Xeon also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the Core i7. PCIe lane counts differ as well: the Xeon provides 40 Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, while the Core i7 provides 16 Gen 3 lanes.

Clock speeds favor the Core i7-9700T in terms of peak frequency. The Core i7 boosts to 4.30 GHz, significantly higher than the Xeon's 3.40 GHz boost. However, the Xeon has a higher base clock at 2.60 GHz versus the Core i7's 2.00 GHz base. Thermal design power is a major difference: the Xeon is rated at 90 W, while the Core i7-9700T is rated at 35 W. The production status for both is end-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon E5-2640 v3 wins in every recorded benchmark head-to-head. Its biggest advantages appear in multithreaded workloads, where its 16 threads and larger 20 MB L3 cache give it a consistent edge. The Xeon also wins in single-threaded tests despite the Core i7's higher boost clock, which indicates that the Xeon's architecture and memory subsystem deliver better per-core results in the recorded Cinebench tests.

The Core i7-9700T has its own strengths that are not captured in the Cinebench comparison. It includes integrated UHD Graphics 630, so it can run a display without a discrete GPU. It has a much lower TDP of 35 W, making it suitable for compact or low-power desktop builds. Its 4.30 GHz boost clock is the highest peak frequency in this comparison, which may matter in workloads that scale with clock speed, though the recorded single-core benchmarks do not reflect an advantage.

The Xeon targets server and workstation use cases: ECC memory support, quad-channel bandwidth, and 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes make it a fit for memory-intensive or reliability-focused systems. The Core i7 targets desktop use with integrated graphics and lower power consumption. For users who need ECC or maximum memory bandwidth, the Xeon is the clear choice. For users who need integrated graphics or minimal power draw, the Core i7 is the only option with those features.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in several key specifications. The Xeon E5-2640 v3 has 16 threads, while the Core i7-9700T has 8. The Xeon has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 3.40 GHz; the Core i7 has a base clock of 2000.00 MHz (2.00 GHz) and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. TDP is 90 W for the Xeon and 35 W for the Core i7.

The socket platforms are different: the Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3, and the Core i7 uses Intel Socket 1151. The Xeon is built on a 22 nm process with a 356 mm² die and 2,600 million transistors; the Core i7 uses a 14 nm process with a 180.3 mm² die and no transistor count listed. L3 cache is 20 MB on the Xeon versus 12 MB on the Core i7.

Memory support differs: the Xeon has quad-channel DDR4 with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core i7 has dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s. ECC memory is supported only on the Xeon. PCIe lanes are 40 Gen 3 on the Xeon versus 16 Gen 3 on the Core i7. The Core i7 includes UHD Graphics 630, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics. The Xeon has a launch MSRP of $939; the Core i7 has a launch MSRP of $323.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data is one-sided. Across six Cinebench tests, the Xeon E5-2640 v3 wins all of them. In multi-core tests, the margin is consistent at 12.3%. Cinebench R15 multi-core scores are 942 for the Xeon versus 839 for the Core i7-9700T. Cinebench R20 multi-core scores are 3926 versus 3496. Cinebench R23 multi-core scores are 9348 versus 8325.

Single-core results show a nearly identical margin. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Xeon scores 132 against 118 for the Core i7, an 11.9% lead. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Xeon scores 553 against 493, a 12.2% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Xeon scores 1319 against 1175, a 12.3% lead. The Core i7-9700T has additional Geekbench results in the database: 5503 multi-core and 1392 single-core, but no Geekbench score is recorded for the Xeon, so those cannot be compared directly.

The average benchmark scores place the Xeon at 2703 and the Core i7 at 2668. The Xeon's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-1185G7E at 2703 (0% delta), the Intel Core i7-8700T at 2701 (0.1% delta), and the Intel Xeon E-2226G at 2709 (-0.2% delta). The Core i7-9700T's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-9500F at 2670 (-0.1% delta) and the Intel Xeon E5-4650 v3 at 2664 (0.1% delta). Both CPUs sit at the 50th percentile among all CPUs in the database.

The consistent 12.3% delta across all three Cinebench generations suggests a stable performance relationship between these two processors, regardless of the workload intensity or the benchmark version. The Xeon's advantage in both single-core and multi-core tests indicates that its architectural design delivers higher throughput per clock in the Cinebench workload, even though the Core i7 has a substantially higher boost clock.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3 as the stronger performer in every recorded benchmark. It wins all six head-to-head Cinebench tests, with multi-core advantages of 12.3% and single-core advantages between 11.9% and 12.3%. Its 16 threads, 20 MB L3 cache, quad-channel memory support, and ECC capability make it the better choice for server and workstation workloads that rely on memory bandwidth, data integrity, or parallel processing.

The Intel Core i7-9700T is the better fit for different reasons. Its 35 W TDP is far lower than the Xeon's 90 W, making it suitable for power-constrained desktop systems. It includes UHD Graphics 630, which removes the need for a discrete graphics card in basic desktop setups. Its 4.30 GHz boost clock is the highest peak frequency in the comparison, even though the recorded single-core benchmarks do not show a resulting win. The Core i7 is also the only one of the two with any Geekbench data in the database.

For buyers who need ECC memory, quad-channel bandwidth, or 40 PCIe lanes, the Xeon E5-2640 v3 is the only option between these two. For buyers who need integrated graphics, a low-power desktop processor, or a smaller socket footprint, the Core i7-9700T is the appropriate pick. The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Xeon is faster in all tested Cinebench scenarios, while the Core i7 wins on power efficiency and platform features.