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 i3-10100F vs Xeon E5-2670 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 i3-10100F vs Xeon E5-2670: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-10100F

2020

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,464 less on MSRP ($88 MSRP vs $1,552 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1626.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 99.0 vs 5.7 PassMark/$ ($88 MSRP vs $1,552 MSRP).
✅Draws 1W instead of 115W, a 114W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-2670 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (8,714 vs 8,901).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 20 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2670, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.

Xeon E5-2670

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+233.3% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 6 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅150% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 5.7 vs 99.0 PassMark/$ ($1,552 MSRP vs $88 MSRP).
❌11400% higher power demand at 115W vs 1W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E5-2670 better than Core i3-10100F?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-2670 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i3-10100F 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 E5-2670 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 4.9% 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 E5-2670 is the stronger fit. You are getting 2.1% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 233.3% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 6 MB).

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

Xeon E5-2670 is still the better call for a fresh build. Xeon E5-2670 comes in 1663.6% more expensive on MSRP at $1,552 MSRP versus $88 MSRP, and it still gives you a 4.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i3-10100F only looks stronger on raw value math because it is so cheap, but its absolute performance tier is too low to be the better recommendation now. At roughly 8,714 PassMark with 4 cores and 8 threads, it only really makes sense as a bare-minimum stopgap or a very constrained existing-platform upgrade.

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

Core i3-10100F makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2012). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i3-10100F vs Xeon E5-2670 Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-10100F

The Core i3-10100F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 12 October 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 8,714 points. Launch price was $122.

Xeon E5-2670

The Xeon E5-2670 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 6 March 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge-EP (2012) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 20480 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 115 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 8,901 points. Launch price was $145.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-10100F packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-2670 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Xeon E5-2670 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i3-10100F versus 3.3 GHz on the Xeon E5-2670 — a 26.3% clock advantage for the Core i3-10100F (base: 3.6 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The Core i3-10100F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E5-2670 uses Sandy Bridge-EP (2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-10100F scores 8,714 against the Xeon E5-2670's 8,901 — a 2.1% lead for the Xeon E5-2670. L3 cache: 6 MB on the Core i3-10100F vs 20480 kB (total) on the Xeon E5-2670.

Feature	Core i3-10100F	Xeon E5-2670
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	8 / 16+100%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+30%	3.3 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+38%	2.6 GHz
L3 Cache	6 MB	20480 kB (total)+233%
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Sandy Bridge-EP (2012)
PassMark	8,714	8,901+2%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-10100F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-2670 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i3-10100F versus DDR3-1600 on the Xeon E5-2670 — the Core i3-10100F supports 66.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon E5-2670 supports up to 384 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 200% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i3-10100F) vs 4 (Xeon E5-2670). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i3-10100F) vs 40 (Xeon E5-2670) — the Xeon E5-2670 offers 24 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel 400 series (Core i3-10100F) and Intel X79,Intel C602 (Xeon E5-2670).

Feature	Core i3-10100F	Xeon E5-2670
Socket	LGA1200	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666+67%	DDR3-1600
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	384 GB+200%
RAM Channels	2	4+100%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	40+150%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Core i3-10100F) / VT-x, VT-d (Xeon E5-2670). Primary use case: Xeon E5-2670 targets Server.

Feature	Core i3-10100F	Xeon E5-2670
Integrated GPU	No	No
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	—	Server

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i3-10100F was priced at $88, while the Xeon E5-2670 came in at $1552. On launch pricing ($88 vs $1552), Core i3-10100F was $1464 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i3-10100F delivers 99.0 pts/$ vs 5.7 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2670 — making the Core i3-10100F the 178.1% better value option.

Feature	Core i3-10100F	Xeon E5-2670
MSRP	$88-94%	$1552
Performance per Dollar	99.0+1637%	5.7
Release Date	2020	2012

Search Core i3-10100F on Amazon

Search Xeon E5-2670 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.