Intel Core i9-13900TE vs Intel Xeon W-2175 Comparison

The Intel Xeon W-2175 sweeps the Intel Core i9-13900TE across every recorded Cinebench test in the database, winning all six head-to-head matchups by a consistent 8% margin. That is the headline, but the story underneath is more nuanced: the Xeon achieves that lead with a 140 W TDP on an older Skylake architecture, while the 13900TE delivers nearly identical aggregate performance at a 35 W TDP, one quarter of the power envelope. The data places them almost dead even in the wider field, with the Xeon at the 61st percentile versus the 60th percentile for the Core i9.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon W-2175 wins everywhere in the recorded benchmark set, and it wins uniformly. Every Cinebench test, single-core and multi-core, across R15, R20, and R23, goes to the Xeon with an 8% delta. In multi-core the Xeon scores 2010 versus 1861 in R15, 8379 versus 7758 in R20, and 19951 versus 18472 in R23. Single-core follows the same pattern: 283 versus 262, 1182 versus 1094, and 2816 versus 2607.

The interpretation matters more than the raw sweep. A uniform 8% gap across both single-core and multi-core workloads indicates the Xeon's advantage is not a throughput effect from its platform or memory subsystem; it behaves like a consistent clock-and-core efficiency lead in these render tests. The Core i9-13900TE counters with a much broader feature set and a far lower power draw, which the database records as 35 W TDP against 140 W, but in pure rendering performance it concedes every test.

The Core i9's wins live outside the benchmark table. It is an active part, while the Xeon is end-of-life. It supports DDR5 alongside DDR4, carries PCI Express Gen 5 (albeit with only 16 CPU lanes versus 48 Gen 3 lanes on the Xeon), and includes UHD Graphics 770 integrated graphics where the Xeon ships with none.

The Verdict

For pure rendering throughput, the data favors the Xeon W-2175 without exception. Buyers who need the highest Cinebench scores between these two specific parts get them from the Xeon, at 8% ahead in every test. Its quad-channel DDR4 platform with 85.3 GB/s of memory bandwidth and 48 PCIe Gen 3 lanes also makes it the natural fit for workstation configurations with heavy I/O or memory demands.

The Core i9-13900TE is the pick for everything else. It matches the Xeon to within 8% in every test while operating at one quarter the TDP, it sits just one percentile point behind in the database rankings (60 versus 61), and it brings a modern platform: DDR5 support, PCIe Gen 5, integrated graphics, and active production status. The Xeon's launch MSRP of $1947 frames it as a premium workstation part of its era; the 13900TE was a desktop-segment release with no MSRP recorded in the database.

Note the context from the rivals list. The Xeon performs within a point of parts like the Intel Xeon E-2388G (-0.6%), the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2920X (0.7%), and the AMD EPYC 7401P (-0.8%). The 13900TE clusters with the Intel Core i9-10900KF (0.5%), AMD EPYC 7281 (0.5%), AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X (0.7%), and Intel Core i9-9900X (0.8%). Both are mid-pack performers in the 60th percentile band, not flagships.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The multi-core results first. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon W-2175 scores 2010 against 1861 for the 13900TE, an 8% win. Cinebench R20 multi-core goes the same way: 8379 versus 7758, again 8% in the Xeon's favor. Cinebench R23 multi-core, the most demanding of the three, lands at 19951 versus 18472, the largest absolute gap in the dataset at 1479 points, still an 8% delta.

Single-core repeats the pattern exactly. R15 single-core: 283 versus 262, the Xeon by 8%. R20 single-core: 1182 versus 1094, the Xeon by 8%. R23 single-core: 2816 versus 2607, the Xeon by 8%.

The consistency itself is the finding. There is no test where the 13900TE's hybrid 24-core design translates into a win, and no test where the Xeon's older Skylake cores fall behind. The database records six wins for the Xeon and zero for the Core i9. On average benchmark score, the Xeon leads 5770 to 5342, which is why the two parts sit one percentile apart, at 61 and 60 respectively.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in Cinebench?

A: The Intel Xeon W-2175. It wins all six recorded Cinebench tests, single-core and multi-core, each by an 8% margin over the Core i9-13900TE.

Q: Does the Core i9-13900TE win any benchmark against the Xeon W-2175?

A: No. The database records six head-to-head tests and the Xeon takes all of them, with the 13900TE at zero wins.

Q: How much more power does the Xeon W-2175 use?

A: The Xeon has a 140 W TDP versus 35 W for the 13900TE, a fourfold difference. Despite that, the Xeon is only 8% faster in the recorded tests.

Q: Do both CPUs support ECC memory?

A: Yes. Both the Xeon W-2175 and the Core i9-13900TE support ECC memory, according to the database.

Q: Which CPU has more cores?

A: The Core i9-13900TE, with 24 cores and 32 threads. The Xeon W-2175 has 14 cores and 28 threads, yet it still outscores the 13900TE in every multi-core benchmark.

Q: Are these CPUs still in production?

A: No, only the Core i9-13900TE is active. The Xeon W-2175 is listed as end-of-life.

Architecture Differences

These are two different Intel eras. The Xeon W-2175 uses the Skylake architecture (codename Skylake-W), fabricated on Intel's 14 nm process, with a die size of 484 mm². The Core i9-13900TE is Raptor Lake (codename Raptor Lake-S) on Intel's 10 nm process, with a much smaller 257 mm² die.

Core topology is where they diverge most. The Xeon is a homogeneous 14-core, 28-thread part. The 13900TE carries 24 cores and 32 threads in Raptor Lake's hybrid design, which explains how a 35 W desktop part can land within 8% of a 140 W workstation chip in heavily threaded rendering.

Cache also favors the newer part. The Xeon provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 19.25 MB of shared L3. The 13900TE supplies 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3, nearly double the L3 capacity.

Platform features split the difference. The Xeon offers a quad-channel DDR4 memory bus rated at 85.3 GB/s of bandwidth and 48 PCI Express Gen 3 CPU lanes, a classic workstation platform on Socket 2066. The 13900TE runs dual-channel DDR4 or DDR5 on Socket 1700 with 16 PCIe Gen 5 CPU lanes, and adds UHD Graphics 770 integrated graphics where the Xeon has none. Both support ECC memory and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

• Cores: Xeon W-2175 has 14; Core i9-13900TE has 24.
• Threads: 28 on the Xeon; 32 on the 13900TE.
• Base clock: 2.50 GHz on the Xeon; 1.00 GHz on the 13900TE.
• Boost clock: 4.30 GHz on the Xeon; 5.00 GHz on the 13900TE.
• TDP: 140 W on the Xeon; 35 W on the 13900TE.
• Socket: Socket 2066 (Xeon) versus Socket 1700 (Core i9).
• Architecture and node: Skylake on 14 nm versus Raptor Lake on 10 nm, both fabbed by Intel.
• Die size: 484 mm² versus 257 mm².
• Cache: 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, 19.25 MB shared L3 (Xeon) versus 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, 36 MB shared L3 (Core i9).
• Memory: DDR4 quad-channel with 85.3 GB/s bandwidth (Xeon) versus DDR4/DDR5 dual-channel with no bandwidth figure recorded (Core i9). Both support ECC.
• PCIe: Gen 3 with 48 CPU lanes (Xeon) versus Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes (Core i9).
• Integrated graphics: none on the Xeon; UHD Graphics 770 on the Core i9.
• Market segment: Server/Workstation (Xeon) versus Desktop (Core i9).
• Production status: End-of-life (Xeon) versus Active (Core i9).
• Release date: 2017-10-14 (Xeon) versus 2023-01-03 (Core i9).
• Launch MSRP: $1947 for the Xeon; none recorded for the Core i9.
• Part numbers: SR3W2 (Xeon) and SRMG1 (Core i9).
• Average benchmark score: 5770 (Xeon, 61st percentile) versus 5342 (Core i9, 60th percentile).