Core i3-10105F vs Xeon E3-1240 v6

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 i3-10105F vs Xeon E3-1240 v6 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 i3-10105F vs Xeon E3-1240 v6: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-10105F

2021

Why buy it

✅Draws 65W instead of 72W, a 7W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon E3-1240 v6.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 8 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $97 MSRP, while Xeon E3-1240 v6 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Xeon E3-1240 v6

2017

Why buy it

✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (8,731 vs 8,912).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i3-10105F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-10105F better than Xeon E3-1240 v6?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E3-1240 v6 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i3-10105F 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 i3-10105F is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.7% 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 i3-10105F is the stronger fit. You are getting 2.1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads.

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

Core i3-10105F is the better buy right now. Core i3-10105F comes in at an unclear MSRP at $97 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (91.9 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core i3-10105F makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2021 vs 2017) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 8 threads instead of 4/8. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i3-10105F vs Xeon E3-1240 v6 Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-10105F

The Core i3-10105F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 16 March 2021 (4 years ago). It is based on the Comet Lake-R (2021) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 8,912 points. Launch price was $97.

Xeon E3-1240 v6

The Xeon E3-1240 v6 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 28 March 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 72 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400, DDR3L-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 8,731 points. Launch price was $272.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i3-10105F and Xeon E3-1240 v6 share an identical 4-core/8-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the Core i3-10105F versus 4.1 GHz on the Xeon E3-1240 v6 — a 7.1% clock advantage for the Core i3-10105F (base: 3.7 GHz vs 3.7 GHz). The Core i3-10105F uses the Comet Lake-R (2021) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E3-1240 v6 uses Kaby Lake (2016−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-10105F scores 8,912 against the Xeon E3-1240 v6's 8,731 — a 2.1% lead for the Core i3-10105F. L3 cache: 6 MB (total) on the Core i3-10105F vs 8 MB on the Xeon E3-1240 v6.

Feature	Core i3-10105F	Xeon E3-1240 v6
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 8
Boost Clock	4.4 GHz+7%	4.1 GHz
Base Clock	3.7 GHz	3.7 GHz
L3 Cache	6 MB (total)	8 MB+33%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	1 MB+300%
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Comet Lake-R (2021)	Kaby Lake (2016−2019)
PassMark	8,912+2%	8,731
Geekbench 6 Single	1,461	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	4,503	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-10105F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E3-1240 v6 uses LGA1151 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.