Key Differences
In short — Core i9-13900KS outperforms Xeon E5-2643 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i9-13900KS is 3964 days newer than Xeon E5-2643.
Advantages of Intel Xeon E5-2643
- Consumes up to 13% less energy than Intel Core i9-13900KS - 130 vs 150 Watts
Advantages of Intel Core i9-13900KS
- Performs up to 42% better in Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Xeon E5-2643 - 166 vs 117 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Xeon E5-2643 - 32 vs 8 threads
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Xeon E5-2643 doesn't have integrated graphics
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Xeon E5-2643
Server/Workstation • Mar 6th, 2012
Core i9-13900KS
Desktop • Jan 12th, 2023
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Xeon E5-2643 | vs | Intel Core i9-13900KS |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 6th, 2012 | Release Date | Jan 12th, 2023 |
| Xeon E5 | Collection | Core i9 |
| Sandy Bridge-EP | Codename | Raptor Lake |
| Intel Socket 2011 | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
| 4 | Cores | 24 |
| 8 | Threads | 32 |
3.3 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.2 GHz |
| 3.5 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 6.0 GHz |
130 W | TDP | 150 W |
| 32 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
33.0x | Multiplier | 32.0x |
| None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 770 |
| No | Overclockable | Yes |
