Core i3-10325 vs Xeon E5-1660 v2

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 i3-10325 vs Xeon E5-1660 v2 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 i3-10325 vs Xeon E5-1660 v2: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-10325

2021

Why buy it

✅Draws 65W instead of 130W, a 65W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-1660 v2 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (10,291 vs 10,332).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 15 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-1660 v2, which brings 6 cores / 12 threads.
❌Launch MSRP is still $154 MSRP, while Xeon E5-1660 v2 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Xeon E5-1660 v2

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+87.5% larger total L3 cache (15 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 6 cores / 12 threads.

Trade-offs

❌100% higher power demand at 130W vs 65W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E5-1660 v2 better than Core i3-10325?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-1660 v2 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i3-10325 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 E5-1660 v2 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.5% 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 E5-1660 v2 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 87.5% larger total L3 cache (15 MB vs 8 MB).

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

Xeon E5-1660 v2 is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i3-10325 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. Xeon E5-1660 v2 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $154 MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i3-10325 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (66.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

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

Core i3-10325 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2021 vs 2013). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i3-10325 vs Xeon E5-1660 v2 Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-10325

The Core i3-10325 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 3.9 GHz, with boost up to 4.7 GHz. L3 cache: 8 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: 10,291 points. Launch price was $154.

Xeon E5-1660 v2

The Xeon E5-1660 v2 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge-E (2013) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 15 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 10,332 points. Launch price was $1,809.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-10325 packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-1660 v2 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Xeon E5-1660 v2 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.7 GHz on the Core i3-10325 versus 4 GHz on the Xeon E5-1660 v2 — a 16.1% clock advantage for the Core i3-10325 (base: 3.9 GHz vs 3.7 GHz). The Core i3-10325 uses the Comet Lake-R (2021) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E5-1660 v2 uses Ivy Bridge-E (2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-10325 scores 10,291 against the Xeon E5-1660 v2's 10,332 — a 0.4% lead for the Xeon E5-1660 v2. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core i3-10325 vs 15 MB (total) on the Xeon E5-1660 v2.

Feature	Core i3-10325	Xeon E5-1660 v2
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	6 / 12+50%
Boost Clock	4.7 GHz+18%	4 GHz
Base Clock	3.9 GHz+5%	3.7 GHz
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	15 MB (total)+88%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Comet Lake-R (2021)	Ivy Bridge-E (2013)
PassMark	10,291	10,332

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-10325 uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-1660 v2 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.