Intel Core i9-13900T vs Intel Xeon Gold 6338T Comparison

The Intel Core i9-13900T and Intel Xeon Gold 6338T are both 24-core processors, but they target different segments of the market. The data shows a clear split between desktop-oriented performance and server-focused throughput, with the Core i9-13900T winning 14 of the 17 head-to-head benchmarks, while the Xeon Gold 6338T takes 3 wins. The average benchmark scores are close—61,723 for the Core i9-13900T versus 60,572 for the Xeon—placing both at the 92nd percentile among all CPUs, but the nature of their wins reveals distinct strengths.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core i9-13900T dominates in single-threaded and lightly-threaded workloads. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 5,155 against the Xeon’s 4,296, a 20% lead. The gap widens dramatically in PassMark single-thread testing, where the Core i9-13900T posts 4,177 versus 2,348 for the Xeon Gold 6338T—a 77.9% advantage. This pattern repeats across all Cinebench versions: R15 single-core shows 519 versus 432 (20.1% ahead), R20 single-core shows 2,165 versus 1,804 (20% ahead), and R23 single-core shows 5,155 versus 4,296 (20% ahead). The Core i9-13900T’s 5.30 GHz boost clock, compared to the Xeon’s 3.40 GHz, is the primary driver of these wins.

Multi-core Cinebench results also favor the Core i9-13900T, though by a smaller margin than the single-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core i9-13900T scores 36,517 versus 30,430 for the Xeon Gold 6338T, a 20% difference. R20 multi-core shows 15,337 versus 12,780 (20% ahead), and R15 multi-core shows 3,680 versus 3,067 (20% ahead). PassMark multithread follows suit: 43,036 for the Core i9-13900T versus 35,801 for the Xeon, a 20.2% win.

The Xeon Gold 6338T’s three wins come in specific server-oriented workloads. It leads in PassMark extended instructions, scoring 43,292 versus 29,719 for the Core i9-13900T—a 31.4% advantage. It also wins in data compression (557,816 versus 538,254, a 3.5% lead) and random string sorting (66,495 versus 63,358, a 4.7% lead). These results suggest the Xeon’s architecture handles certain instruction sets and memory-access patterns more efficiently.

The most lopsided result is in PassMark physics, where the Core i9-13900T scores 2,497 versus 1,160 for the Xeon Gold 6338T—a 115.3% advantage. The Core i9-13900T also shows strong wins in data encryption (34,415 versus 24,677, up 39.5%) and find prime numbers (175 versus 118, up 48.3%). Floating point math goes to the Core i9-13900T by 20.1% (108,779 versus 90,584), while integer math is closer, with the Core i9-13900T ahead by just 3.3% (157,324 versus 152,275).

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on different architectures, despite sharing the same 10 nm manufacturing process and Intel as the foundry. The Core i9-13900T uses Raptor Lake (Raptor Lake-S), while the Xeon Gold 6338T uses Ice Lake (Ice Lake-SP). This generational split explains many of the benchmark differences.

Core and thread counts differ significantly. Both have 24 cores, but the Core i9-13900T supports 32 threads, while the Xeon Gold 6338T supports 48 threads. The Core i9-13900T relies on a hybrid design with 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Xeon Gold 6338T uses a more traditional symmetric layout with 24 cores and 48 threads, indicating the Xeon has hyper-threading on all cores, whereas the Core i9-13900T likely has some efficiency cores without it.

Cache hierarchies are similar in total L3 capacity—both have 36 MB shared L3—but differ at lower levels. The Core i9-13900T has 80 KB L1 per core and 2 MB L2 per core, while the Xeon Gold 6338T has 64 KB L1 per core and 1 MB L2 per core. The Core i9-13900T’s larger per-core caches contribute to its single-thread performance advantage.

Memory support diverges sharply. The Core i9-13900T supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus, while the Xeon Gold 6338T supports only DDR4 but with an eight-channel memory bus. The Xeon’s memory bandwidth is rated at 204.8 GB/s, a figure not provided for the Core i9-13900T. The Xeon’s eight-channel configuration provides significantly higher aggregate memory bandwidth, which helps in the extended instructions and data compression workloads where it wins.

PCIe capabilities also differ. The Core i9-13900T offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Xeon Gold 6338T offers Gen 4 with 64 lanes (CPU only). The Xeon’s higher lane count supports more expansion devices, typical for server platforms, while the Core i9-13900T’s Gen 5 support provides faster per-lane bandwidth for desktop peripherals.

The Core i9-13900T includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 770), while the Xeon Gold 6338T has no integrated graphics. Both support ECC memory. The Core i9-13900T is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700, while the Xeon Gold 6338T is a server/workstation part on Intel Socket 4189. The Core i9-13900T has a TDP of 35 watts, compared to the Xeon’s 165 watts, and a launch MSRP of $549; the Xeon has no launch MSRP listed.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core i9-13900T wins every single-thread benchmark by a wide margin. In PassMark single-thread, it scores 4,177 versus 2,348 for the Xeon Gold 6338T, a 77.9% advantage. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 20% lead (5,155 versus 4,296).

Q: Does the Xeon Gold 6338T win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins 3 of the 17 head-to-head tests. It leads in PassMark extended instructions (43,292 versus 29,719, a 31.4% advantage), data compression (557,816 versus 538,254, up 3.5%), and random string sorting (66,495 versus 63,358, up 4.7%).

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: Both processors have 24 cores. The Core i9-13900T has 32 threads, while the Xeon Gold 6338T has 48 threads. The Xeon’s higher thread count does not translate to a multi-thread win in Cinebench R23, where the Core i9-13900T leads 36,517 to 30,430.

Q: What is the difference in memory architecture?

A: The Core i9-13900T supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus. The Xeon Gold 6338T supports only DDR4 but uses an eight-channel memory bus, providing 204.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth. This eight-channel configuration helps the Xeon in bandwidth-intensive server workloads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core i9-13900T boosts to 5.30 GHz, while the Xeon Gold 6338T boosts to 3.40 GHz. The Core i9-13900T’s higher boost clock is a major factor in its single-thread and physics benchmark wins.

Q: Are both processors in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both are at the 92nd percentile among all CPUs. Their average benchmark scores are close, with the Core i9-13900T at 61,723 and the Xeon Gold 6338T at 60,572, a difference of about 1.9%.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i9-13900T | Intel Xeon Gold 6338T |

|---|---|---|

| Threads | 32 | 48 |

| Base Clock | 1100.00 MHz | 2100.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.30 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 165 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel Socket 4189 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Ice Lake |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-S | Ice Lake-SP |

| Generation | Core i9 (Raptor Lake) | Xeon Gold (Ice Lake-SP) |

| Die Size | 257 mm² | Not specified |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Eight-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not specified | 204.8 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 64 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | None |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | 2023-01-03 | 2021-04-05 |

| Launch MSRP | $549 | Not specified |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-13900T is the clear winner for desktop and consumer workloads. Its 77.9% lead in PassMark single-thread and 115.3% lead in PassMark physics make it ideal for interactive applications, gaming, and general productivity. The 20% advantage across all Cinebench versions shows strong performance in rendering, though the Xeon’s 48 threads close the gap somewhat. The Core i9-13900T also wins in encryption (39.5% ahead) and prime number finding (48.3% ahead), which benefit from its higher clock speeds and larger per-core caches. Its 35-watt TDP makes it a power-efficient choice for desktop systems, and the integrated UHD Graphics 770 provides a display output without a discrete GPU.

The Intel Xeon Gold 6338T wins in niches that leverage its eight-channel memory architecture and server design. The 31.4% lead in extended instructions suggests better support for specialized instruction sets used in scientific and enterprise software. Its wins in data compression (3.5%) and random string sorting (4.7%) indicate efficient handling of large data sets. The 64 PCIe Gen 4 lanes and 204.8 GB/s memory bandwidth make it suited for servers with heavy I/O and memory demands. The Xeon’s 48 threads provide more parallel capacity for multi-threaded server workloads, even if the Core i9-13900T still wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core by 20%. The Xeon’s lack of integrated graphics is typical for server processors, where a dedicated GPU or remote management is used.

The nearest rival data reinforces this split. The Core i9-13900T sits within 0.2% of the Core i9-13900K and Core i9-13900KF, indicating it trades almost nothing for its lower 35-watt TDP. The Xeon Gold 6338T is within 0.9% of the Core i9-14900F and 0.8% of AMD’s Ryzen 9 7945HX, showing it remains competitive in its segment. The Core i9-13900T’s closest rival, the Xeon 636, is 0.6% behind, suggesting the desktop chip also holds up against server parts. In summary, the Core i9-13900T wins on raw speed and efficiency, while the Xeon Gold 6338T wins on memory bandwidth and server-specific instruction throughput.