Core 2 Duo T5670 vs Xeon E5-1603

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.

Core 2 Duo T5670 vs Xeon E5-1603 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core 2 Duo T5670 vs Xeon E5-1603: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core 2 Duo T5670

2008

Why buy it

✅Draws 2W instead of 130W, a 128W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-1603 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (3,440 vs 3,482).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 10 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-1603, which brings 4 cores / 4 threads.

Xeon E5-1603

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +9.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+400% larger total L3 cache (10 MB vs 2 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 4 threads.

Trade-offs

❌6400% higher power demand at 130W vs 2W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E5-1603 better than Core 2 Duo T5670?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-1603 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core 2 Duo T5670 is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Xeon E5-1603 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 9.2% 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, Xeon E5-1603 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.2% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 400% larger total L3 cache (10 MB vs 2 MB).

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

Xeon E5-1603 still makes the most sense overall. Xeon E5-1603 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 9.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Xeon E5-1603 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2008), 400% larger total L3 cache (10 MB vs 2 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core 2 Duo T5670 vs Xeon E5-1603 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core 2 Duo T5670

The Core 2 Duo T5670 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Merom-2M (2008) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB L2 Cache. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 3,440 points. Launch price was $249.

Xeon E5-1603

The Xeon E5-1603 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency: 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 10 MB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800, DDR3-1066. Passmark benchmark score: 3,482 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core 2 Duo T5670 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Xeon E5-1603 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Xeon E5-1603 has 2 more cores. The Core 2 Duo T5670 is built on the Merom-2M (2008) architecture. In PassMark, the Core 2 Duo T5670 scores 3,440 against the Xeon E5-1603's 3,482 — a 1.2% lead for the Xeon E5-1603. L3 cache: 2 MB L2 Cache on the Core 2 Duo T5670 vs 10 MB on the Xeon E5-1603.

Feature	Core 2 Duo T5670	Xeon E5-1603
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	1.8 GHz	—
Base Clock	1.8 GHz	2.8 GHz+56%
L3 Cache	2 MB L2 Cache	10 MB+400%
L2 Cache	2 MB	—
Process	65 nm	32 nm-51%
Architecture	Merom-2M (2008)	—
PassMark	3,440	3,482+1%