And by the way, Xeon CPUs aren't usually faster than regular Intel chips. They may have more cache or more cores, which might speed up some programs. But otherwise, they're the same. Or even slower since their motherboards don't overclock well, overclocking not being a big selling point for servers.
It's like saying that mercedes with 2.0 engine is the same as 65 AMG. So writing that they are the same is like writing that every car is the same because they all drive.
You do not overclock in 99.99% cases Xeon server cpus. You do not buy 12 core xeon to use one core, don't you? of course Xeon is faster for the use case you are buying it. A LOT faster in many cases than what you called "regular" chips. You are writing about home use cases from what I see and Xeon series is mainly for server use.
Biggest difference with i7 vs xeon, xeon can handle sometimes upwares of 1tb of ram now. i7 maxes out at 64gb. You be the judge. i7 were usually 32gb, especially the LGA1100 series. The LGA2011 were @ i7 handled 64gb. LGA 2011 Xeon's are all 64GB+. Also support for ECC ram. So basically if you are not pressed for raw CPU, and you need just a lot of cpu for simulations, VM's etc, xeon is your go to CPU. Xeon LGA2011 series has some crazy CPU Socket configurations, you can get a lot depending on the motherboard vendor. I think some as many as 4+ CPU Sockets. i7 cannot run in parallel with another socket I believe. Just like with the LGA2011 1600 vs 2600 series xeons.
The previous generation (5820k, etc) were only officially rated for 64GB, but they too worked fine with 128GB in practice. Intel just never updated the spec sheets once 16GB DIMMs became available.
It's a bit cheaper, and the downside is an occasional bad cat pic, or maybe an extra browser crash per month to add to the 399 one already gets from poor code ...
And even if you don't use GPUs, now there are M.2 SSDs which commonly use 4X PCIe lanes, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M.2