Core i3-2340UE vs Xeon E5335

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 i3-2340UE vs Xeon E5335 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 i3-2340UE vs Xeon E5335: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-2340UE

2011

Why buy it

✅Draws 17W instead of 80W, a 63W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 3000, while Xeon E5335 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,545 vs 1,549).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 8 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5335, which brings 4 cores / 4 threads.
❌Launch MSRP is still $200 MSRP, while Xeon E5335 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Xeon E5335

2006

Why buy it

✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 3 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 4 threads.

Trade-offs

❌370.6% higher power demand at 80W vs 17W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-2340UE can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E5335 better than Core i3-2340UE?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5335 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i3-2340UE 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 E5335 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.1% more average FPS across 47 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E5335 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 166.7% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 3 MB).

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

Xeon E5335 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Xeon E5335 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $200 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 47 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i3-2340UE only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop chip, not because it is a real desktop gaming recommendation. It simply does not keep up in modern games.

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

Core i3-2340UE makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2006). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i3-2340UE vs Xeon E5335 Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-2340UE

The Core i3-2340UE is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 June 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Max frequency: 1.3 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,545 points. Launch price was $250.

Xeon E5335

The Xeon E5335 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Clovertown (2006−2007) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB L2 Cache. L2 cache: 4 MB (total). Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA771. Thermal design power (TDP): 80 Watt. Memory support: DDR2, DDR3 Depends on motherboard. Passmark benchmark score: 1,549 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-2340UE packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the Xeon E5335 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Xeon E5335 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.3 GHz on the Core i3-2340UE versus 2 GHz on the Xeon E5335 — a 42.4% clock advantage for the Xeon E5335. The Core i3-2340UE uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Xeon E5335 uses Clovertown (2006−2007) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-2340UE scores 1,545 against the Xeon E5335's 1,549 — a 0.3% lead for the Xeon E5335. L3 cache: 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-2340UE vs 8 MB L2 Cache on the Xeon E5335.

Feature	Core i3-2340UE	Xeon E5335
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	1.3 GHz	2 GHz+54%
Base Clock	—	2 GHz
L3 Cache	3 MB (total)	8 MB L2 Cache+167%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)+6300%	4 MB (total)
Process	32 nm-51%	65 nm
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Clovertown (2006−2007)
PassMark	1,545	1,549
Geekbench 6 Single	230	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-2340UE uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Xeon E5335 uses LGA771 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i3-2340UE	Xeon E5335
Socket	BGA1023	LGA771
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, EPT (Core i3-2340UE) / not specified (Xeon E5335). The Core i3-2340UE includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 3000), while the Xeon E5335 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-2340UE targets Embedded. Direct competitor: Core i3-2340UE rivals Embedded G-Series.