Core i3-1125G4 vs Xeon E3-1275 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 i3-1125G4 vs Xeon E3-1275 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 i3-1125G4 vs Xeon E3-1275 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 i3-1125G4

2021

Why buy it

✅+0.9% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 15W instead of 73W, a 58W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics (48 EU), while Xeon E3-1275 v6 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E3-1275 v6 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Xeon E3-1275 v6

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +18.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (9,202 vs 9,284).
❌Launch MSRP is still $499 MSRP, while Core i3-1125G4 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌386.7% higher power demand at 73W vs 15W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-1125G4 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-1125G4 better than Xeon E3-1275 v6?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E3-1275 v6 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i3-1125G4 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, Core i3-1125G4 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.9% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads.

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

Core i3-1125G4 is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon E3-1275 v6 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. Core i3-1125G4 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $499 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.9% better PassMark. The compromise is that Xeon E3-1275 v6 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 18.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Xeon E3-1275 v6 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (18.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 i3-1125G4 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2021 vs 2017), more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 8 threads instead of 4/8, and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i3-1125G4 vs Xeon E3-1275 v6 Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-1125G4

The Core i3-1125G4 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 31 March 2021 (4 years ago). It is based on the Tiger Lake-UP3 (2020−2021) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm SuperFin process technology. Socket: FCBGA1449. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 9,284 points. Launch price was $281.

Xeon E3-1275 v6

The Xeon E3-1275 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 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 73 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400, DDR3L-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 9,202 points. Launch price was $339.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i3-1125G4 and Xeon E3-1275 v6 share an identical 4-core/8-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the Core i3-1125G4 versus 4.2 GHz on the Xeon E3-1275 v6 — a 12.7% clock advantage for the Xeon E3-1275 v6 (base: 2 GHz vs 3.8 GHz). The Core i3-1125G4 uses the Tiger Lake-UP3 (2020−2021) architecture (10 nm SuperFin), while the Xeon E3-1275 v6 uses Kaby Lake (2016−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-1125G4 scores 9,284 against the Xeon E3-1275 v6's 9,202 — a 0.9% lead for the Core i3-1125G4. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core i3-1125G4 vs 8 MB on the Xeon E3-1275 v6.

Feature	Core i3-1125G4	Xeon E3-1275 v6
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 8
Boost Clock	3.7 GHz	4.2 GHz+14%
Base Clock	2 GHz	3.8 GHz+90%
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	8 MB
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)+25%	1 MB
Process	10 nm SuperFin-29%	14 nm
Architecture	Tiger Lake-UP3 (2020−2021)	Kaby Lake (2016−2019)
PassMark	9,284	9,202
Cinebench R23 Multi	5,112	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,560	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	4,770	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-1125G4 uses the FCBGA1449 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon E3-1275 v6 uses LGA1151 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i3-1125G4	Xeon E3-1275 v6
Socket	FCBGA1449	LGA1151
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0+33%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-3200	—
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i3-1125G4) / not specified (Xeon E3-1275 v6). The Core i3-1125G4 includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics (48 EU)), while the Xeon E3-1275 v6 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-1125G4 targets Productivity. Direct competitor: Core i3-1125G4 rivals Ryzen 3 5300U.