PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Core i7-13700K

2022

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+36.4% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 22 MB).
✅Costs $4,593 less on MSRP ($409 MSRP vs $5,002 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1865.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 111.9 vs 5.7 PassMark/$ ($409 MSRP vs $5,002 MSRP).
✅Draws 125W instead of 205W, a 80W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3245M, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Xeon W-3245M

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅220% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-13700K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (18,500 vs 31,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (22 MB vs 30 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 5.7 vs 111.9 PassMark/$ ($5,002 MSRP vs $409 MSRP).
❌64% higher power demand at 205W vs 125W.

Core i7-13700K

2022

Xeon W-3245M

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+36.4% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 22 MB).
✅Costs $4,593 less on MSRP ($409 MSRP vs $5,002 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1865.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 111.9 vs 5.7 PassMark/$ ($409 MSRP vs $5,002 MSRP).
✅Draws 125W instead of 205W, a 80W reduction.

Why buy it

✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅220% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅AVX-512 support for select workstation, AI, and scientific workloads.

Trade-offs

❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3245M, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-13700K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (18,500 vs 31,000).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (22 MB vs 30 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 5.7 vs 111.9 PassMark/$ ($5,002 MSRP vs $409 MSRP).
❌64% higher power demand at 205W vs 125W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-13700K better than Xeon W-3245M?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon W-3245M makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-13700K is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i7-13700K is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 6.7% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-13700K is the better fit. You are getting 67.6% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 16 cores and 24 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 36.4% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 22 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core i7-13700K is the smarter buy today. Core i7-13700K is $4,593 cheaper on MSRP at $409 MSRP versus $5,002 MSRP, and it gives you a 6.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 1865.1% better value on MSRP (111.9 vs 5.7 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i7-13700K is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2022 vs 2019), a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of LGA3647, 36.4% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 22 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 24 threads instead of 16/32. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core i7-13700K Benchmark Check

Xeon W-3245M Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i7-13700K	Xeon W-3245M
1080p
low	284 FPS	185 FPS
medium	268 FPS	150 FPS
high	223 FPS	123 FPS
ultra	190 FPS	98 FPS
1440p
low	238 FPS	148 FPS
medium	200 FPS	117 FPS
high	159 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	139 FPS	78 FPS
4K
low	159 FPS	82 FPS
medium	134 FPS	70 FPS
high	103 FPS	56 FPS
ultra	90 FPS	44 FPS

Open Core i7-13700K Open Xeon W-3245M

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i7-13700K	Xeon W-3245M
1080p
low	689 FPS	531 FPS
medium	580 FPS	447 FPS
high	484 FPS	372 FPS
ultra	439 FPS	335 FPS
1440p
low	595 FPS	461 FPS
medium	525 FPS	399 FPS
high	441 FPS	336 FPS
ultra	378 FPS	290 FPS
4K
low	348 FPS	287 FPS
medium	314 FPS	248 FPS
high	295 FPS	228 FPS
ultra	261 FPS	199 FPS

Open Core i7-13700K Open Xeon W-3245M

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i7-13700K	Xeon W-3245M
1080p
low	648 FPS	712 FPS
medium	530 FPS	712 FPS
high	467 FPS	712 FPS
ultra	405 FPS	712 FPS
1440p
low	591 FPS	712 FPS
medium	491 FPS	712 FPS
high	427 FPS	677 FPS
ultra	371 FPS	603 FPS
4K
low	434 FPS	524 FPS
medium	374 FPS	428 FPS
high	339 FPS	387 FPS
ultra	290 FPS	314 FPS

Open Core i7-13700K Open Xeon W-3245M

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i7-13700K	Xeon W-3245M
1080p
low	970 FPS	712 FPS
medium	883 FPS	712 FPS
high	766 FPS	712 FPS
ultra	689 FPS	712 FPS
1440p
low	829 FPS	712 FPS
medium	740 FPS	712 FPS
high	642 FPS	696 FPS
ultra	566 FPS	601 FPS
4K
low	567 FPS	646 FPS
medium	515 FPS	566 FPS
high	463 FPS	504 FPS
ultra	404 FPS	437 FPS

Open Core i7-13700K Open Xeon W-3245M

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-13700K and Xeon W-3245M

Core i7-13700K

The Core i7-13700K is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 September 2022 (3 years ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022) architecture. It features 16 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 45,784 points. Launch price was $409.

Xeon W-3245M

The Xeon W-3245M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 June 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Cascade Lake (2019−2020) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.6 GHz. L3 cache: 22 MB. L2 cache: 16 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 205 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 28,494 points. Launch price was $5,002.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-13700K packs 16 cores / 24 threads, matching the Xeon W-3245M's 16 cores. Boost clocks reach 5.4 GHz on the Core i7-13700K versus 4.6 GHz on the Xeon W-3245M — a 16% clock advantage for the Core i7-13700K (base: 3.4 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The Core i7-13700K uses the Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Xeon W-3245M uses Cascade Lake (2019−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-13700K scores 45,784 against the Xeon W-3245M's 28,494 — a 46.6% lead for the Core i7-13700K. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 31,000 vs 18,500 (50.5% advantage for the Core i7-13700K). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,846 vs 1,474, a 63.5% lead for the Core i7-13700K that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 18,980 vs 11,572 (48.5% advantage for the Core i7-13700K). L3 cache: 30 MB (total) on the Core i7-13700K vs 22 MB on the Xeon W-3245M.

Feature	Core i7-13700K	Xeon W-3245M
Cores / Threads	16 / 24	16 / 32
Boost Clock	5.4 GHz+17%	4.6 GHz
Base Clock	3.4 GHz+6%	3.2 GHz
L3 Cache	30 MB (total)+36%	22 MB
L2 Cache	2 MB (per core)	16 MB+700%
Process	Intel 7 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022)	Cascade Lake (2019−2020)
PassMark	45,784+61%	28,494
Cinebench R23 Multi	31,000+68%	18,500
Geekbench 6 Single	2,846+93%	1,474
Geekbench 6 Multi	18,980+64%	11,572

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-13700K uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon W-3245M uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-5600 on the Core i7-13700K versus DDR4-2933 on the Xeon W-3245M — the Core i7-13700K supports 22.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon W-3245M supports up to 2048 GB of RAM compared to 192 GB — 165.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i7-13700K) vs 6 (Xeon W-3245M). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i7-13700K) vs 64 (Xeon W-3245M) — the Xeon W-3245M offers 44 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel Z790,Intel H770,Intel B760,Intel Z690,Intel H670,Intel B660,Intel H610 (Core i7-13700K) and C621 (Xeon W-3245M).

Feature	Core i7-13700K	Xeon W-3245M
Socket	LGA1700	LGA3647
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+67%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-5600+25%	DDR4-2933
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB	2048 GB+967%
RAM Channels	2	6+200%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	64+220%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core i7-13700K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Xeon W-3245M supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: true (Core i7-13700K) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon W-3245M). The Core i7-13700K includes integrated graphics (Intel UHD Graphics 770), while the Xeon W-3245M requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Xeon W-3245M targets Professional Workstation / Mac Pro. Direct competitor: Core i7-13700K rivals Ryzen 9 7900X; Xeon W-3245M rivals Xeon Gold 6242.

Feature	Core i7-13700K	Xeon W-3245M
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Intel UHD Graphics 770	—
Unlocked	Yes	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	true	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	—	Professional Workstation / Mac Pro

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i7-13700K launched at $409 MSRP, while the Xeon W-3245M debuted at $5002. On MSRP ($409 vs $5002), the Core i7-13700K is $4593 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-13700K delivers 111.9 pts/$ vs 5.7 pts/$ for the Xeon W-3245M — making the Core i7-13700K the 180.6% better value option.