Xeon w7-3565X vs i9-10900E
Aggregate performance score
Xeon w7-3565X outperforms Core i9-10900E by a whopping 294% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i9-10900E and Xeon w7-3565X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 620 | 35 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 12.85 | 49.12 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Power efficiency | 17.84 | 13.63 |
| Architecture codename | Comet Lake (2020) | Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 30 April 2020 (4 years ago) | 24 August 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $488 | $2,689 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon w7-3565X has 282% better value for money than i9-10900E.
Detailed specifications
Core i9-10900E and Xeon w7-3565X basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 10 (Deca-Core) | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) |
| Threads | 20 | 64 |
| Base clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 2.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.7 GHz | 4.8 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 20 MB (shared) | 82.5 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | Intel 7 nm |
| Die size | 206 mm2 | 4x 477 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 79 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Core i9-10900E and Xeon w7-3565X compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | 1200 | FCLGA4677 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 335 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i9-10900E and Xeon w7-3565X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| TSX | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | + |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
Core i9-10900E and Xeon w7-3565X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | - |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i9-10900E and Xeon w7-3565X are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i9-10900E and Xeon w7-3565X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR5-4800 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 4 TB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 8 |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel UHD Graphics 630 | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i9-10900E and Xeon w7-3565X.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 112 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 12.72 | 50.08 |
| Recency | 30 April 2020 | 24 August 2024 |
| Physical cores | 10 | 32 |
| Threads | 20 | 64 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 335 Watt |
i9-10900E has 415.4% lower power consumption.
Xeon w7-3565X, on the other hand, has a 293.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and 220% more physical cores and 220% more threads.
The Xeon w7-3565X is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i9-10900E in performance tests.
Note that Core i9-10900E is a desktop processor while Xeon w7-3565X is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i9-10900E and Xeon w7-3565X, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
