Intel Core i9-9920X vs Intel Xeon W-2175 Comparison

The Intel Core i9-9920X and Intel Xeon W-2175 are both 14 nm Intel Socket 2066 processors from the Skylake family, yet benchmark data shows a consistent performance gap favoring the i9-9920X across every tested workload. The i9-9920X wins all six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, with margins ranging from 5.5% to 5.7%, despite the Xeon W-2175 offering two additional physical cores. The data positions the i9-9920X as the stronger performer in both single-threaded and multi-threaded tasks, while the Xeon W-2175 counters with server-oriented features like ECC memory support and additional PCIe lanes. Both chips sit at the 61st percentile among all CPUs, but their average benchmark scores differ by 147 points (5917 vs 5770), reinforcing the i9-9920X’s edge in raw compute.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Xeon W-2175 has 14 cores and 28 threads, while the Intel Core i9-9920X has 12 cores and 24 threads. The Xeon’s two extra cores do not translate into a benchmark win, as the i9-9920X leads all multi-core Cinebench results.

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap?

A: The i9-9920X leads by 5.7% in Cinebench R15 single-core (299 vs 283) and by 5.5% in both Cinebench R20 (1247 vs 1182) and R23 (2971 vs 2816). The i9-9920X’s higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz versus 4.30 GHz likely contributes to this consistent margin.

Q: Does the Xeon W-2175 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Xeon W-2175 supports ECC memory, while the i9-9920X does not. Both processors share quad-channel DDR4 memory support and an identical 85.3 GB/s memory bandwidth.

Q: What is the difference in PCIe lane count?

A: The Xeon W-2175 provides 48 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only), while the i9-9920X offers 44 lanes. This gives the Xeon a four-lane advantage for expansion, which is relevant for workstation configurations.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. The i9-9920X has an unlocked multiplier, whereas the Xeon W-2175 is locked. This makes the i9-9920X the only one of the two that can be overclocked.

Q: What is the launch MSRP for each?

A: The i9-9920X launched at $1189, and the Xeon W-2175 launched at $1947. The Xeon’s higher launch price is not reflected in higher benchmark scores.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel’s 14 nm process with a 484 mm² die size, and they share the same Skylake architecture. The i9-9920X uses the Skylake-X codename, while the Xeon W-2175 uses Skylake-W. Cache layouts are identical: 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 19.25 MB shared L3. The core counts differ — 12 cores for the i9-9920X versus 14 for the Xeon — but the i9-9920X compensates with higher clock speeds.

Clock speed is the primary architectural differentiator. The i9-9920X runs at a 3.50 GHz base clock and 4.50 GHz boost clock, while the Xeon W-2175 operates at 2.50 GHz base and 4.30 GHz boost. The 1.0 GHz base clock advantage for the i9-9920X is substantial, and its 0.2 GHz boost advantage helps in single-threaded workloads. The i9-9920X also has a higher TDP of 165 watts versus the Xeon’s 140 watts, reflecting its more aggressive clock strategy.

Memory and expansion features diverge. The Xeon W-2175 supports ECC memory, a staple for server reliability, while the i9-9920X does not. The Xeon also offers 48 PCIe Gen 3 lanes versus 44 on the i9-9920X. The i9-9920X is classified as a desktop part with an unlocked multiplier, while the Xeon W-2175 is a server/workstation part with a locked multiplier. Both are end-of-life products, with the i9-9920X releasing later (2018-10-18) than the Xeon (2017-10-14).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The i9-9920X wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, taking 6 out of 6 tests. The margin is remarkably consistent across all Cinebench versions. In multi-core tests, the i9-9920X scores 2121 in Cinebench R15 versus 2010 for the Xeon W-2175, a 5.5% advantage. The same 5.5% gap appears in Cinebench R20 (8839 vs 8379) and Cinebench R23 (21046 vs 19951). This consistency suggests the i9-9920X’s clock speed advantage fully offsets the Xeon’s two extra cores.

Single-core results show a slightly larger gap. The i9-9920X leads by 5.7% in Cinebench R15 (299 vs 283), and by 5.5% in both R20 (1247 vs 1182) and R23 (2971 vs 2816). The i9-9920X’s 4.50 GHz boost clock is the clear driver here, as single-threaded performance depends almost entirely on clock speed rather than core count.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this narrative. The i9-9920X averages 5917 across all benchmarks, while the Xeon W-2175 averages 5770 — a 2.5% overall gap. Both processors sit at the 61st percentile among all CPUs, meaning they occupy the same tier of overall performance despite the i9-9920X’s consistent lead. The i9-9920X’s nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7451 (5915, 0% delta) and Intel Xeon W-2170B (5985, -1.1%), while the Xeon W-2175’s closest competitor is the Intel Xeon E-2388G (5805, -0.6%).

The Verdict

The Intel Core i9-9920X is the better performer in every benchmark test, making it the clear choice for raw compute workloads. Its 5.5% multi-core advantage over the Xeon W-2175 is significant, especially since the Xeon has two more cores. The i9-9920X’s higher base and boost clocks deliver consistent wins across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, covering both single-core and multi-core scenarios.

The Xeon W-2175 is not without merit, but its advantages are in features, not performance. ECC memory support and 48 PCIe lanes make it suitable for server-class reliability and expansion, while its lower 140-watt TDP may appeal to power-constrained systems. However, the data shows no benchmark where the Xeon wins. For users prioritizing compute performance, the i9-9920X is the definitive choice. For those needing ECC memory or maximum PCIe connectivity, the Xeon W-2175 offers those capabilities at the cost of slower clocks and a higher launch MSRP.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications:

• Cores: 12 (i9-9920X) vs 14 (Xeon W-2175)
• Threads: 24 (i9-9920X) vs 28 (Xeon W-2175)
• Base Clock: 3.50 GHz (i9-9920X) vs 2.50 GHz (Xeon W-2175)
• Boost Clock: 4.50 GHz (i9-9920X) vs 4.30 GHz (Xeon W-2175)
• TDP: 165 W (i9-9920X) vs 140 W (Xeon W-2175)
• ECC Memory: No (i9-9920X) vs Yes (Xeon W-2175)
• PCIe Lanes: 44 (i9-9920X) vs 48 (Xeon W-2175)
• Market Segment: Desktop (i9-9920X) vs Server/Workstation (Xeon W-2175)
• Unlocked Multiplier: Yes (i9-9920X) vs No (Xeon W-2175)
• Release Date: 2018-10-18 (i9-9920X) vs 2017-10-14 (Xeon W-2175)
• Launch MSRP: $1189 (i9-9920X) vs $1947 (Xeon W-2175)

Shared specifications include the 14 nm process, 484 mm² die size, 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, 19.25 MB shared L3, quad-channel DDR4 memory, and 85.3 GB/s memory bandwidth.

Where Each One Wins

The i9-9920X wins in all performance-oriented scenarios. Its 6-0 head-to-head record covers every benchmark tested, from single-core Cinebench R15 (299 vs 283) to multi-core R23 (21046 vs 19951). The i9-9920X is the pick for compute-heavy tasks like rendering, video encoding, and simulation, where its clock speed advantage delivers a 5.5% average uplift over the Xeon. Its unlocked multiplier also makes it the better choice for overclocking enthusiasts, though the data reflects stock performance only.

The Xeon W-2175 wins in feature-oriented scenarios. Its ECC memory support is critical for error-correcting workloads in servers and workstations, and its 48 PCIe lanes provide more headroom for GPU or storage expansion. The Xeon’s lower 140-watt TDP may also appeal to systems with tighter thermal budgets. However, these are qualitative advantages — the benchmark data shows no compute workload where the Xeon outperforms the i9-9920X. The Xeon W-2175 is the appropriate choice when reliability and expansion matter more than peak performance, while the i9-9920X is the definitive winner for any benchmark-driven workload.