Xeon E5-2666 V3 vs Core i9-9900KF

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Core i9-9900KF
2019
8 cores / 16 threads
11.85
+28%

Core i9-9900KF outperforms Xeon E5-2666 V3 by 28% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i9-9900KF and Xeon E5-2666 V3 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking593755
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation14.65no data
Market segmentDesktop processorServer
SeriesIntel Core i9no data
Architecture codenameCoffee Lake-R (2018−2019)Haswell-EP (2014)
Release date8 January 2019 (5 years ago)13 November 2014 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$488no data
Current price$386 (0.8x MSRP)$59

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core i9-9900KF and Xeon E5-2666 V3 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)10 (Deca-Core)
Threads1620
Base clock speed3.6 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed5 GHz3.5 GHz
Bus support4 × 8 GT/sno data
L1 cache64K (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)256K (per core)
L3 cache16 MB (shared)25 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm22 nm
Die sizeno data356 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data2,600 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplierYesNo

Compatibility

Information on Core i9-9900KF and Xeon E5-2666 V3 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 configuration12
SocketFCLGA11512011-3
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt135 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i9-9900KF and Xeon E5-2666 V3. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2no data
AES-NI++
AVX++
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX++
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+no data
SIPP-no data
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Core i9-9900KF and Xeon E5-2666 V3 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
MPX+no data
Identity Protection+no data
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i9-9900KF and Xeon E5-2666 V3 are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i9-9900KF and Xeon E5-2666 V3. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2666DDR3, DDR42133 MHz Quad-channel
Maximum memory size128 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth41.6 GB/sno data
ECC memory support-no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i9-9900KF and Xeon E5-2666 V3.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes1640

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.

i9-9900KF 11.85
+28%
Xeon E5-2666 V3 9.26

Core i9-9900KF outperforms Xeon E5-2666 V3 by 28% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

i9-9900KF 18324
+27.9%
Xeon E5-2666 V3 14325

Core i9-9900KF outperforms Xeon E5-2666 V3 by 28% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.85 9.26
Recency 8 January 2019 13 November 2014
Physical cores 8 10
Threads 16 20
Chip lithography 14 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 135 Watt

The Core i9-9900KF is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon E5-2666 V3 in performance tests.

Be aware that Core i9-9900KF is a desktop processor while Xeon E5-2666 V3 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i9-9900KF and Xeon E5-2666 V3, 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 Core i9-9900KF
Core i9-9900KF
Intel Xeon E5-2666 V3
Xeon E5-2666 V3

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.


3.8 463 votes

Rate Core i9-9900KF on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 2706 votes

Rate Xeon E5-2666 V3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i9-9900KF or Xeon E5-2666 V3, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.