Core 2 Quad Q6700 vs Xeon X3320

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 Quad Q6700 vs Xeon X3320 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 Quad Q6700 vs Xeon X3320: 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 Quad Q6700

2007

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $530 MSRP, while Xeon X3320 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Xeon X3320

2008

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,082 vs 2,092).

Quick Answers

So, is Core 2 Quad Q6700 better than Xeon X3320?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon X3320 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core 2 Quad Q6700 is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core 2 Quad Q6700 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.6% 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 2 Quad Q6700 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.5% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core 2 Quad Q6700 is the better buy right now. Core 2 Quad Q6700 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $530 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (3.9 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Xeon X3320 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2008 vs 2007). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core 2 Quad Q6700 vs Xeon X3320 Technical Specifications

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

Core 2 Quad Q6700

The Core 2 Quad Q6700 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Kentsfield (2007) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.66 GHz, with boost up to 2.67 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 8 MB (total). Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,092 points. Launch price was $249.

Xeon X3320

The Xeon X3320 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. Base frequency: 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB L2 Cache. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 2,082 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core 2 Quad Q6700 is built on the Kentsfield (2007) architecture. In PassMark, the Core 2 Quad Q6700 scores 2,092 against the Xeon X3320's 2,082 — a 0.5% lead for the Core 2 Quad Q6700. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Core 2 Quad Q6700 vs 6 MB L2 Cache on the Xeon X3320.

Feature	Core 2 Quad Q6700	Xeon X3320
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	—
Boost Clock	2.67 GHz	—
Base Clock	2.66 GHz+6%	2.5 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	6 MB L2 Cache
L2 Cache	8 MB (total)	—
Process	65 nm	45 nm-31%
Architecture	Kentsfield (2007)	—
PassMark	2,092	2,082