Core i3-1305U 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 i3-1305U 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 i3-1305U 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 i3-1305U

2023

Why buy it

✅+25% larger total L3 cache (10 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Draws 15W instead of 72W, a 57W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA1744 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1151 and DDR4.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel UHD Graphics, while Xeon E3-1240 v6 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E3-1240 v6 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (8,634 vs 8,731).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E3-1240 v6, which brings 4 cores / 8 threads.

Xeon E3-1240 v6

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +8.4% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 8 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 10 MB).
❌380% higher power demand at 72W vs 15W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1151 with DDR4, while Core i3-1305U moves to FCBGA1744 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-1305U can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E3-1240 v6 better than Core i3-1305U?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E3-1240 v6 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i3-1305U 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 E3-1240 v6 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 8.4% 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 E3-1240 v6 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads.

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

Xeon E3-1240 v6 still makes the most sense overall. Xeon E3-1240 v6 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 8.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Core i3-1305U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2017), a healthier platform with FCBGA1744 and DDR5 instead of LGA1151, and 25% larger total L3 cache (10 MB vs 8 MB). That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Core i3-1305U vs Xeon E3-1240 v6 Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-1305U

The Core i3-1305U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 January 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-U (2023) architecture. It features 5 cores and 6 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.5 GHz. L3 cache: 10 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1744. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-5200, DDR4-3200, LPDDR4x-4267. Passmark benchmark score: 8,634 points. Launch price was $309.

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

The Core i3-1305U packs 5 cores / 6 threads, while the Xeon E3-1240 v6 offers 4 cores / 8 threads — the Core i3-1305U has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 4.5 GHz on the Core i3-1305U versus 4.1 GHz on the Xeon E3-1240 v6 — a 9.3% clock advantage for the Core i3-1305U (base: 1.6 GHz vs 3.7 GHz). The Core i3-1305U uses the Raptor Lake-U (2023) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Xeon E3-1240 v6 uses Kaby Lake (2016−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-1305U scores 8,634 against the Xeon E3-1240 v6's 8,731 — a 1.1% lead for the Xeon E3-1240 v6. L3 cache: 10 MB (total) on the Core i3-1305U vs 8 MB on the Xeon E3-1240 v6.

Feature	Core i3-1305U	Xeon E3-1240 v6
Cores / Threads	5 / 6+25%	4 / 8
Boost Clock	4.5 GHz+10%	4.1 GHz
Base Clock	1.6 GHz	3.7 GHz+131%
L3 Cache	10 MB (total)+25%	8 MB
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)+25%	1 MB
Process	Intel 7 nm-50%	14 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake-U (2023)	Kaby Lake (2016−2019)
PassMark	8,634	8,731+1%
Cinebench R23 Multi	4,388	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,960	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,900	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-1305U uses the FCBGA1744 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon E3-1240 v6 uses LGA1151 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i3-1305U	Xeon E3-1240 v6
Socket	FCBGA1744	LGA1151
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+67%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-5200	—
Max RAM Capacity	96 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	20	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i3-1305U) / not specified (Xeon E3-1240 v6). The Core i3-1305U includes integrated graphics (Intel UHD Graphics), while the Xeon E3-1240 v6 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-1305U targets Budget Laptop.