Core 7 160UL vs Xeon E5-2628L v4

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 7 160UL vs Xeon E5-2628L v4 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 7 160UL vs Xeon E5-2628L v4: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core 7 160UL

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +10.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 15W instead of 75W, a 60W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (11,043 vs 11,079).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 30 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2628L v4, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads.

Xeon E5-2628L v4

2016

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.
✅+150% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core 7 160UL across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌400% higher power demand at 75W vs 15W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core 7 160UL better than Xeon E5-2628L v4?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-2628L v4 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core 7 160UL is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E5-2628L v4 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 12 cores and 24 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 150% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 12 MB).

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

Core 7 160UL still makes the most sense overall. Core 7 160UL comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 10.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Core 7 160UL makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2016) and a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of the older platform. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Core 7 160UL vs Xeon E5-2628L v4 Technical Specifications

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

Core 7 160UL

The Core 7 160UL is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 April 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-PS (2024) architecture. It features 10 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 5.2 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 11,043 points. Launch price was $149.

Xeon E5-2628L v4

The Xeon E5-2628L v4 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 June 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Max frequency: 1.9 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB. L2 cache: 3 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 75 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 11,079 points. Launch price was $1,364.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core 7 160UL packs 10 cores / 12 threads, while the Xeon E5-2628L v4 offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the Xeon E5-2628L v4 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.2 GHz on the Core 7 160UL versus 1.9 GHz on the Xeon E5-2628L v4 — a 93% clock advantage for the Core 7 160UL. The Core 7 160UL uses the Raptor Lake-PS (2024) architecture (10 nm), while the Xeon E5-2628L v4 uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core 7 160UL scores 11,043 against the Xeon E5-2628L v4's 11,079 — a 0.3% lead for the Xeon E5-2628L v4. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core 7 160UL vs 30 MB on the Xeon E5-2628L v4.

Feature	Core 7 160UL	Xeon E5-2628L v4
Cores / Threads	10 / 12	12 / 24+20%
Boost Clock	5.2 GHz+174%	1.9 GHz
Base Clock	1.8 GHz	—
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	30 MB+150%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)	3 MB+140%
Process	10 nm-29%	14 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake-PS (2024)	Broadwell (2015−2019)
PassMark	11,043	11,079