
Core i3-10320

Xeon E5-2687W
Core i3-10320 vs Xeon E5-2687W Performance Spectrum
About PassMark
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 i3-10320 vs Xeon E5-2687W 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.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant

Among Us

Apex Legends

ARC Raiders

Baldur's Gate 3

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Core i3-10320 vs Xeon E5-2687W: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
Core i3-10320
2020Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +3.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $1,731 less on MSRP ($154 MSRP vs $1,885 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 1116.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 64.8 vs 5.3 PassMark/$ ($154 MSRP vs $1,885 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 91W instead of 150W, a 59W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (9,972 vs 10,036).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 20 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2687W, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads.
Xeon E5-2687W
2012Why buy it
- ✅+0.6% higher PassMark.
- ✅+150% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 8 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i3-10320 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 5.3 vs 64.8 PassMark/$ ($1,885 MSRP vs $154 MSRP).
- ❌64.8% higher power demand at 150W vs 91W.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i3-10320 better than Xeon E5-2687W?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Core i3-10320 vs Xeon E5-2687W Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i3-10320
The Core i3-10320 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 April 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Comet Lake-S (2020) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4.6 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 9,972 points. Launch price was $162.

Xeon E5-2687W
The Xeon E5-2687W 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 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 20480 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 150 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 10,036 points. Launch price was $815.
Processing Power
The Core i3-10320 packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-2687W offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Xeon E5-2687W has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core i3-10320 versus 3.8 GHz on the Xeon E5-2687W — a 19% clock advantage for the Core i3-10320 (base: 3.8 GHz vs 3.1 GHz). The Core i3-10320 uses the Comet Lake-S (2020) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E5-2687W uses Sandy Bridge-EP (2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-10320 scores 9,972 against the Xeon E5-2687W's 10,036 — a 0.6% lead for the Xeon E5-2687W. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core i3-10320 vs 20480 kB (total) on the Xeon E5-2687W.
| Feature | Core i3-10320 | Xeon E5-2687W |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 8 | 8 / 16+100% |
| Boost Clock | 4.6 GHz+21% | 3.8 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.8 GHz+23% | 3.1 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 8 MB (total) | 20480 kB (total)+150% |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 256 kB (per core) |
| Process | 14 nm-56% | 32 nm |
| Architecture | Comet Lake-S (2020) | Sandy Bridge-EP (2012) |
| PassMark | 9,972 | 10,036 |
Memory & Platform
The Core i3-10320 uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-2687W uses LGA2011 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i3-10320 | Xeon E5-2687W |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1200 | LGA2011 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+50% | PCIe 2.0 |
Value Analysis
At launch, the Core i3-10320 was priced at $154, while the Xeon E5-2687W came in at $1885. On launch pricing ($154 vs $1885), Core i3-10320 was $1731 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i3-10320 delivers 64.8 pts/$ vs 5.3 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2687W — making the Core i3-10320 the 169.6% better value option.
| Feature | Core i3-10320 | Xeon E5-2687W |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $154-92% | $1885 |
| Performance per Dollar | 64.8+1123% | 5.3 |
| Release Date | 2020 | 2012 |
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.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.














