Core 2 Duo T5670 vs Xeon X5698

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 X5698 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 X5698: 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 X5698 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (3,440 vs 3,447).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 12 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon X5698, which brings 2 cores / 4 threads.

Xeon X5698

2011

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +13.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+500% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 2 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 2 cores / 4 threads.

Trade-offs

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

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon X5698 better than Core 2 Duo T5670?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon X5698 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 X5698 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 13.1% 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 X5698 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 500% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 2 MB).

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

Xeon X5698 still makes the most sense overall. Xeon X5698 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 13.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Xeon X5698 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2008), 500% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 2 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 2 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 X5698 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 X5698

The Xeon X5698 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Westmere-EP (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 4.4 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 GHz. L3 cache: 12288 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1366. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,447 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core 2 Duo T5670 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Xeon X5698's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 1.8 GHz on the Core 2 Duo T5670 versus 4.4 GHz on the Xeon X5698 — a 83.9% clock advantage for the Xeon X5698 (base: 1.8 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The Core 2 Duo T5670 uses the Merom-2M (2008) architecture (65 nm), while the Xeon X5698 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Duo T5670 scores 3,440 against the Xeon X5698's 3,447 — a 0.2% lead for the Xeon X5698. L3 cache: 2 MB L2 Cache on the Core 2 Duo T5670 vs 12288 kB (total) on the Xeon X5698.

Feature	Core 2 Duo T5670	Xeon X5698
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	1.8 GHz	4.4 GHz+144%
Base Clock	1.8 GHz	4.4 GHz+144%
L3 Cache	2 MB L2 Cache	12288 kB (total)+500%
L2 Cache	2 MB+700%	256 kB (per core)
Process	65 nm	32 nm-51%
Architecture	Merom-2M (2008)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	3,440	3,447

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Core 2 Duo T5670) / VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon X5698). Primary use case: Xeon X5698 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Xeon X5698 rivals Core i7-980X.