i9-13900KS vs Xeon W-3275M

Aggregate performance score

Xeon W-3275M
2019
28 cores / 56 threads, 205 Watt
26.03
Core i9-13900KS
2023
24 cores / 32 threads, 150 Watt
40.25
+54.6%

Core i9-13900KS outperforms Xeon W-3275M by an impressive 55% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon W-3275M and Core i9-13900KS processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19472
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.9654.92
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Xeon Wno data
Power efficiency11.5824.47
Architecture codenameCascade Lake (2019−2020)Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)
Release date3 June 2019 (5 years ago)12 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$7,453$699

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

i9-13900KS has 1007% better value for money than Xeon W-3275M.

Detailed specifications

Xeon W-3275M and Core i9-13900KS 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 cores28 (Octacosa-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads5632
Base clock speed2.5 GHz3.2 GHz
Boost clock speed4.6 GHz5.8 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier25no data
L1 cache1.75 MB80K (per core)
L2 cache28 MB2 MB (per core)
L3 cache38.5 MB36 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nmIntel 7 nm
Die sizeno data257 mm2
Maximum core temperature76 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Xeon W-3275M and Core i9-13900KS 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketFCLGA3647FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)205 Watt150 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon W-3275M and Core i9-13900KS. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVX-512Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift++
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX++
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0++
Deep Learning Boost++

Security technologies

Xeon W-3275M and Core i9-13900KS technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon W-3275M and Core i9-13900KS are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon W-3275M and Core i9-13900KS. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2933DDR5-5600, DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size2 TB192 GB
Max memory channels62
Maximum memory bandwidth140.8 GB/s89.6 GB/s
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel UHD Graphics 770
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data1.65 GHz
Execution Unitsno data32

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Xeon W-3275M and Core i9-13900KS integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data4

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Xeon W-3275M and Core i9-13900KS integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096 x 2160 @ 60Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data5120 x 3200 @ 120Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Xeon W-3275M and Core i9-13900KS integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.5

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon W-3275M and Core i9-13900KS.

PCIe version3.05.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanes6420

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.

Xeon W-3275M 26.03
i9-13900KS 40.25
+54.6%

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.

Xeon W-3275M 39834
i9-13900KS 61592
+54.6%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Xeon W-3275M 1219
i9-13900KS 3135
+157%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Xeon W-3275M 12239
i9-13900KS 21732
+77.6%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 26.03 40.25
Recency 3 June 2019 12 January 2023
Physical cores 28 24
Threads 56 32
Power consumption (TDP) 205 Watt 150 Watt

Xeon W-3275M has 16.7% more physical cores and 75% more threads.

i9-13900KS, on the other hand, has a 54.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and 36.7% lower power consumption.

The Core i9-13900KS is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon W-3275M in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon W-3275M is a server/workstation processor while Core i9-13900KS is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon W-3275M and Core i9-13900KS, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Xeon W-3275M
Xeon W-3275M
Intel Core i9-13900KS
Core i9-13900KS

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3 63 votes

Rate Xeon W-3275M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 828 votes

Rate Core i9-13900KS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon W-3275M or Core i9-13900KS, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.