Xeon w5-2545 vs i9-13900K
Aggregate performance score
Core i9-13900K outperforms Xeon w5-2545 by a considerable 41% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i9-13900K and Xeon w5-2545 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 88 | 188 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 62.93 | 83.24 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | Intel Core i9 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 28.10 | 11.83 |
| Architecture codename | Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022) | Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 27 September 2022 (2 years ago) | 24 August 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $589 | $889 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Xeon w5-2545 has 32% better value for money than i9-13900K.
Detailed specifications
Core i9-13900K and Xeon w5-2545 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 | 24 (Tetracosa-Core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 32 | 24 |
| Base clock speed | 3 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.7 GHz | 4.7 GHz |
| Bus rate | 4 × 16 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 30 | no data |
| L1 cache | 80K (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 2 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 36 MB (shared) | 30 MB |
| Chip lithography | Intel 7 nm | Intel 7 nm |
| Die size | 257 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 72 °C | 74 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Core i9-13900K and Xeon w5-2545 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 | FCLGA1700 | FCLGA4677 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 210 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i9-13900K and Xeon w5-2545. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Speed Shift | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| SIPP | + | - |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | + | + |
| Deep Learning Boost | + | + |
Security technologies
Core i9-13900K and Xeon w5-2545 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | + |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| SGX | no data | - |
| OS Guard | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i9-13900K and Xeon w5-2545 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i9-13900K and Xeon w5-2545. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5-4800 |
| Maximum memory size | 192 GB | 2 TB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 4 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 89.604 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel UHD Graphics 770 | N/A |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Clear Video HD | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.65 GHz | no data |
| Execution Units | 32 | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Core i9-13900K and Xeon w5-2545 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 4 | no data |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Core i9-13900K and Xeon w5-2545 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | 4096 x 2160 @ 60Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over eDP | 5120 x 3200 @ 120Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | 7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Core i9-13900K and Xeon w5-2545 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | 12 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i9-13900K and Xeon w5-2545.
| PCIe version | 5.0 and 4.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 20 | 64 |
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 | 37.09 | 26.24 |
| Recency | 27 September 2022 | 24 August 2024 |
| Physical cores | 24 | 12 |
| Threads | 32 | 24 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 210 Watt |
i9-13900K has a 41.3% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, and 68% lower power consumption.
Xeon w5-2545, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year.
The Core i9-13900K is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon w5-2545 in performance tests.
Note that Core i9-13900K is a desktop processor while Xeon w5-2545 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i9-13900K and Xeon w5-2545, 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.
