Intel Core i9-11900KB vs Intel Xeon E5-2699A v4 Comparison

The Intel Core i9-11900KB and the Intel Xeon E5-2699A v4 represent two very different approaches to high-end computing. The i9-11900KB is a modern, mobile-derived Tiger Lake part with a high boost clock, while the Xeon E5-2699A v4 is a legacy Broadwell-EP server chip built for massive multi-threaded throughput. The benchmark data shows a clear and consistent winner across all recorded tests, but the reasons behind that victory are rooted in architecture and intended use case.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clean sweep for the Intel Core i9-11900KB. In every single Cinebench test, the i9-11900KB outperforms the Xeon E5-2699A v4, with a remarkably consistent margin. The delta is almost uniformly 8.4%, with the only exception being the Cinebench R15 single-core test, where the margin is 8.3%.

Looking at the multi-core results, the i9-11900KB scores 1946 in Cinebench R15, compared to the Xeon's 1796. This is an 8.4% advantage. The pattern holds in Cinebench R20, where the i9-11900KB scores 8112 against the Xeon's 7486, again an 8.4% lead. In the more demanding Cinebench R23 multi-core test, the i9-11900KB posts 19316, while the Xeon manages 17826. The 8.4% delta persists, showing that the i9-11900KB's advantage scales consistently with workload intensity.

The single-core results are even more telling. The i9-11900KB scores 274 in Cinebench R15 single-core, versus 253 for the Xeon. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the scores are 1145 and 1056, respectively. The Cinebench R23 single-core test shows 2727 for the i9-11900KB and 2516 for the Xeon. These results highlight a fundamental difference in design philosophy. The i9-11900KB is built for high frequency, with a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, while the Xeon E5-2699A v4 tops out at 3.60 GHz. This clock speed advantage translates directly into superior per-thread performance.

The average benchmark score in the database further confirms the i9-11900KB's position. It holds an average score of 5587, placing it in the 61st percentile of all CPUs. The Xeon E5-2699A v4, with an average score of 5259, sits in the 60th percentile. While the percentile difference is small, the raw score difference is significant. The i9-11900KB's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-12700T and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 3700, with scores of 5606 and 5610, respectively. The Xeon E5-2699A v4, on the other hand, is closest to the Intel Core i5-14401E and the Intel Core i7-11700B. This places the two processors in different performance tiers despite their similar percentile rankings.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The Intel Core i9-11900KB is the faster processor in every benchmark recorded. It wins all six head-to-head comparisons, with a consistent 8.4% lead in both single-core and multi-core workloads. Anyone prioritizing raw Cinebench performance should choose the i9-11900KB without hesitation.

The Xeon E5-2699A v4, however, is not without its merits. It offers 22 cores and 44 threads, compared to the i9-11900KB's 8 cores and 16 threads. It also supports ECC memory and has a quad-channel memory bus, features that are critical for certain server and workstation environments. The i9-11900KB, by contrast, has no ECC support and uses a dual-channel memory bus. The Xeon also has a larger L3 cache at 55 MB shared, versus 24 MB shared on the i9-11900KB. For workloads that are not purely compute-bound, such as large virtualized environments or memory-intensive database tasks, the Xeon's platform features could be more valuable than its lower benchmark scores.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The i9-11900KB uses the Tiger Lake architecture, specifically Tiger Lake-H, and is fabricated on a 10 nm process node. The Xeon E5-2699A v4 uses the Broadwell architecture, specifically Broadwell-EP, on a 14 nm process node. This generational gap explains much of the performance difference. The newer 10 nm process allows for higher clock speeds and better power efficiency, which is reflected in the i9-11900KB's 5.30 GHz boost clock versus the Xeon's 3.60 GHz.

The core counts are starkly different. The i9-11900KB has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Xeon E5-2699A v4 has 22 cores and 44 threads. Despite having nearly three times the core count, the Xeon cannot overcome the i9-11900KB's per-core performance advantage in Cinebench. The cache hierarchy also differs. The i9-11900KB has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, while the Xeon has 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core. The Xeon's L3 cache is larger at 55 MB shared, but the i9-11900KB's 24 MB shared L3 is still substantial.

The i9-11900KB includes integrated graphics in the form of UHD Graphics 750, while the Xeon E5-2699A v4 has no integrated graphics. This makes the i9-11900KB a more self-contained solution for systems without a discrete GPU. The Xeon, on the other hand, is designed for servers where a GPU is typically present or not needed.

Specification Differences

The specification sheet shows several key differences between the two processors.

| Specification | Intel Core i9-11900KB | Intel Xeon E5-2699A v4 |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Cores / Threads | 8 / 16 | 22 / 44 |

| Base Clock | 3.30 GHz | 2.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.30 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 145 W |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 14 nm |

| L3 Cache | 24 MB (shared) | 55 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes | Gen 3, 40 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 750 | None |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1787 | Intel Socket 2011-3 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Launch MSRP | $539 | $4938 |

The i9-11900KB has a significantly higher boost clock and a much lower TDP of 65 W, compared to the Xeon's 145 W. The Xeon offers more PCIe lanes (40 vs 20) and supports PCIe Gen 3, while the i9-11900KB supports the newer PCIe Gen 4. The Xeon's memory bandwidth is higher at 76.8 GB/s due to its quad-channel bus, but the i9-11900KB's dual-channel setup still delivers 51.2 GB/s. The Xeon is the only one of the two that supports ECC memory.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core i9-11900KB is faster in all recorded multi-core tests. It leads by 8.4% in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core benchmarks, scoring 1946, 8112, and 19316, respectively, compared to the Xeon E5-2699A v4's 1796, 7486, and 17826.

Q: Does the Xeon E5-2699A v4 have more cores?

A: Yes, the Xeon E5-2699A v4 has 22 cores and 44 threads, while the Intel Core i9-11900KB has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-2699A v4 supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i9-11900KB does not.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The Xeon E5-2699A v4 has a quad-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Intel Core i9-11900KB has a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i9-11900KB has a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, which is significantly higher than the Xeon E5-2699A v4's 3.60 GHz.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No, both processors are end-of-life. The Xeon E5-2699A v4 was released on 2016-10-24, while the i9-11900KB has no recorded release date in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-11900KB wins in every benchmark category recorded. It is the clear choice for applications that depend on high single-thread performance, such as gaming, general desktop use, and lightly threaded productivity tasks. Its high boost clock of 5.30 GHz and modern 10 nm architecture give it a decisive edge in Cinebench single-core tests, where it leads by 8.3% to 8.4%. It also wins in multi-core tests, making it a strong all-around performer despite its lower core count. Its lower TDP of 65 W and integrated graphics make it a more efficient and self-contained option for compact systems.

The Intel Xeon E5-2699A v4 wins in scenarios that require its specific platform features. Its 22 cores and 44 threads provide a high core count for heavily parallelized server workloads. The support for ECC memory and a quad-channel memory bus with 76.8 GB/s of bandwidth makes it suitable for mission-critical applications where data integrity and memory throughput are paramount. Its 40 PCIe Gen 3 lanes offer more expansion capability for add-in cards. While it loses in raw Cinebench performance, its larger L3 cache of 55 MB and higher core count could benefit certain database, virtualization, and content-creation workloads that are optimized for many cores and large caches. The Xeon is the pick for a server platform, while the i9-11900KB is the pick for raw speed.