Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Core i7-13700K outperforms the more expensive Xeon E5-2699A v4 on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Core i7-13700K is 2163 days newer than the more expensive Xeon E5-2699A v4.
Advantages of Intel Core i7-13700K
- Performs up to 25% better in Total War: WARHAMMER III than Xeon E5-2699A v4 - 211 vs 169 FPS
- Up to 79% cheaper than Xeon E5-2699A v4 - $240.57 vs $1166.95
- Up to 83% better value when playing Total War: WARHAMMER III than Xeon E5-2699A v4 - $1.27 vs $7.66 per FPS
- Consumes up to 14% less energy than Intel Xeon E5-2699A v4 - 125 vs 145 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2699A v4 doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2699A v4
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i7-13700K - 44 vs 24 threads
Total War: WARHAMMER III
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 27th, 2022
FPS
211
100%
Value, €/FPS
€1.27/FPS
100%
Price, €
€267.03
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for €267.03 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 55 minutes ago
Buy for €1,295.31 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 54 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 27th, 2022
Desktop • Oct 25th, 2016
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i7-13700K | vs | Intel Xeon E5-2699A v4 |
---|---|---|
Sep 27th, 2022 | Release Date | Oct 25th, 2016 |
Core i7 | Collection | Xeon E5 |
Raptor Lake | Codename | Broadwell |
Intel Socket 1700 | Socket | Intel Socket 2011-3 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
16 | Cores | 22 |
24 | Threads | 44 |
3.4 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.4 GHz |
5.4 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 145 W |
10 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
34.0x | Multiplier | 24.0x |
UHD Graphics 770 | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | No |