Intel Core i9-9900T vs Intel Xeon E5-1680 v4 Comparison

The Intel Core i9-9900T and Intel Xeon E5-1680 v4 are both 8-core, 16-thread processors, but they target fundamentally different platforms and use cases. The i9-9900T is a low-power desktop part built for compact and silent builds, while the Xeon E5-1680 v4 is a high-power workstation processor designed for maximum throughput in a server-class platform. The benchmark data shows a clear performance advantage for the Xeon, but the i9-9900T offers features like integrated graphics and a dramatically lower power envelope that may be more important to some users.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs come from different architectural generations and are built for different market segments. The Core i9-9900T uses the Coffee Lake architecture, specifically the Coffee Lake-R refresh, and is built on Intel's 14 nm process. It is a mainstream desktop part, evidenced by its use of the Intel Socket 1151 and its integrated UHD Graphics 630. This means it can run without a dedicated graphics card, which is a significant advantage for basic systems or troubleshooting. The chip has a die size of 180.3 mm² and is part of the Core i9 generation, representing the top of the consumer desktop lineup at its release.

In contrast, the Xeon E5-1680 v4 is based on the older Broadwell architecture, specifically Broadwell-EP, and is also built on a 14 nm process. It is a server and workstation-class chip, designed for the Intel Socket 2011-3 platform. This is a major difference, as the Xeon does not have integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU for any visual output. The Xeon is a much larger chip, with a die size of 246 mm² and 3,400 million transistors, reflecting its more complex enterprise-focused design. This difference in physical size and transistor count is a key indicator of the Xeon's more robust internal architecture, even if its per-core performance is not dramatically higher.

The cache configurations also differ. Both chips have 64 KB of L1 cache and 256 KB of L2 cache per core. However, the Xeon E5-1680 v4 has a larger shared L3 cache at 20 MB, compared to the i9-9900T's 16 MB. This additional cache can help with workloads that repeatedly access a large working set of data. Furthermore, the Xeon supports ECC memory, which is a crucial feature for data integrity in servers and professional workstations, while the i9-9900T does not. The i9-9900T's architecture is focused on delivering high single-threaded clocks and efficient operation, while the Xeon is built for sustained multi-threaded loads and platform reliability.

Specification Differences

The most striking difference is power consumption. The Core i9-9900T has a TDP of 35 watts, while the Xeon E5-1680 v4 has a TDP of 140 watts. This is a fourfold difference, making the i9-9900T exceptionally easy to cool and suitable for small form factor builds with minimal airflow. The Xeon, by contrast, requires a substantial cooling solution and a power delivery system robust enough to handle its needs.

Clock speeds also differ significantly. The i9-9900T has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The Xeon E5-1680 v4 starts at a higher base clock of 3.40 GHz but has a lower boost clock of 4.00 GHz. This indicates the i9-9900T has a wider dynamic range, capable of running at lower clocks to save power and boosting higher for single-threaded tasks. The Xeon's higher base clock suggests it is designed to run at a more constant, sustained pace.

Memory support is another major differentiator. The i9-9900T supports dual-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The Xeon E5-1680 v4 supports quad-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. This gives the Xeon nearly double the memory bandwidth, which is critical for heavily threaded applications that move large amounts of data. The PCIe connectivity also differs, with the i9-9900T offering 16 Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, while the Xeon offers 40 Gen 3 lanes, allowing for more expansion cards and high-speed NVMe storage devices.

The launch MSRP reflects their different market positions. The Core i9-9900T has a launch MSRP of $423, while the Xeon E5-1680 v4 has a launch MSRP of $1723. Both processors are now end-of-life and are no longer in production, but these original prices highlight the Xeon's enterprise-class positioning. Both chips have locked multipliers, meaning they cannot be overclocked by adjusting the multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The Intel Core i9-9900T has a higher boost clock at 4.40 GHz, compared to the Xeon E5-1680 v4's 4.00 GHz.

Q: Does the Xeon E5-1680 v4 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon E5-1680 v4 supports ECC memory, while the Core i9-9900T does not.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i9-9900T includes UHD Graphics 630, while the Xeon E5-1680 v4 has no integrated graphics and will require a separate GPU.

Q: How much faster is the Xeon in the Cinebench R23 multi-core test?

A: The Xeon E5-1680 v4 scores 12080 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the i9-9900T scores 11091. This results in the Xeon being 8.2% faster.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two?

A: The Xeon E5-1680 v4 offers 76.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth, which is significantly higher than the 42.7 GB/s offered by the Core i9-9900T.

Q: Are both chips from the same process node?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core i9-9900T and the Intel Xeon E5-1680 v4 are manufactured on a 14 nm process node.

The Verdict

The data shows a clear performance winner: the Intel Xeon E5-1680 v4. It outperforms the i9-9900T in every single benchmark test recorded, across all versions of Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, in both single-core and multi-core tests. The Xeon's higher base clock and larger cache, combined with its quad-channel memory interface, give it a consistent edge in raw compute throughput.

However, the choice is not simply about performance. The Core i9-9900T is the better pick for users building a quiet, compact, or power-efficient system. Its 35-watt TDP is a fraction of the Xeon's 140-watt TDP, making it far easier to cool in small form factor cases. It also includes integrated graphics, removing the need for a dedicated GPU in basic systems, and it has a higher boost clock for snappy single-threaded performance.

Anyone with a need for maximum multi-threaded performance on a professional workstation platform should choose the Xeon E5-1680 v4. Its quad-channel memory and 40 PCIe lanes are essential for high-bandwidth workloads like video editing, 3D rendering, and scientific computing. The ECC memory support is non-negotiable for users who require high data reliability. The i9-9900T is for the builder who values efficiency and convenience, while the Xeon is for the professional who prioritizes throughput and platform capabilities, regardless of power draw.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are remarkably consistent. In every single test, the Intel Xeon E5-1680 v4 wins by the same margin of 8.2%. There is no workload in the data where the Core i9-9900T manages to take the lead.

In the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the Xeon scores 1217 against the i9-9900T's 1117. The single-core test shows a similar pattern, with the Xeon scoring 171 versus 157. This 8.2% delta persists across all versions of the benchmark. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Xeon scores 5073 compared to 4658, and in the single-core test, it scores 716 versus 657.

The most recent benchmark, Cinebench R23, confirms the trend. The Xeon E5-1680 v4 achieves a multi-core score of 12080, while the i9-9900T scores 11091. In the single-core test, the Xeon scores 1705, and the i9-9900T scores 1565. The consistency of this 8.2% gap across all tests suggests a fundamental performance advantage for the Xeon, likely stemming from its higher base clock and larger L3 cache, rather than any workload-specific optimization.

Interestingly, the average benchmark score for the two processors is nearly identical. The i9-9900T has an average score of 3499, and the Xeon E5-1680 v4 has an average score of 3494. This is because the average calculation includes Geekbench scores for the i9-9900T, which are not present in the Xeon's data. The i9-9900T scores 7298 in Geekbench multi-core and 1452 in single-core. Without these results, the Xeon's performance lead in the Cinebench suite is consistent and clear.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon E5-1680 v4 wins across the board in the provided benchmark suite, but the nature of those wins points to its strengths. It excels in sustained multi-threaded workloads where the memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s can be fully utilized. The 8.2% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core shows that tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, and software compilation will complete faster on the Xeon. Its support for ECC memory and 40 PCIe lanes makes it the appropriate choice for a professional workstation where data integrity and expandability are paramount. It also wins in all single-core tests, though the margin is the same 8.2%, indicating that its higher base clock of 3.40 GHz provides a solid foundation for all types of work.

The Intel Core i9-9900T does not win any benchmark tests, but it wins in other measurable ways. Its 35-watt TDP is a massive advantage for system design. It can be cooled by a capable air cooler and operates in environments where noise and heat are major concerns. The presence of UHD Graphics 630 means a system with this CPU can be fully functional without a discrete GPU, which is a significant win for basic office work, media streaming, and reducing system cost. Its higher boost clock of 4.40 GHz and dual-channel memory are sufficient for most general-purpose tasks and gaming, even if it trails the Xeon in synthetic benchmarks. In summary, the Xeon E5-1680 v4 is the winner for raw processing power and professional platform features, while the Core i9-9900T is the winner for efficiency, compact builds, and systems that need integrated graphics.