Core i3-3240 vs Xeon E5-2403

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 i3-3240 vs Xeon E5-2403 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 i3-3240 vs Xeon E5-2403: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-3240

2012

Why buy it

✅Draws 55W instead of 80W, a 25W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,352 vs 2,367).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 10 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2403, which brings 4 cores / 4 threads.
❌Launch MSRP is still $132 MSRP, while Xeon E5-2403 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Xeon E5-2403

2012

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.
✅+233.3% larger total L3 cache (10 MB vs 3 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 4 threads.

Trade-offs

❌45.5% higher power demand at 80W vs 55W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-3240 better than Xeon E5-2403?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-2403 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i3-3240 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, Xeon E5-2403 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 233.3% larger total L3 cache (10 MB vs 3 MB).

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

Core i3-3240 is the better buy right now. Core i3-3240 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $132 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Xeon E5-2403 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.6% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (17.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Xeon E5-2403 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 233.3% larger total L3 cache (10 MB vs 3 MB) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i3-3240 vs Xeon E5-2403 Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-3240

The Core i3-3240 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 September 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,352 points. Launch price was $75.

Xeon E5-2403

The Xeon E5-2403 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 May 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge-EN (2012) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 10240 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 80 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,367 points. Launch price was $230.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-3240 packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the Xeon E5-2403 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Xeon E5-2403 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.4 GHz on the Core i3-3240 versus 1.8 GHz on the Xeon E5-2403 — a 61.5% clock advantage for the Core i3-3240 (base: 3.4 GHz vs 1.8 GHz). The Core i3-3240 uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Xeon E5-2403 uses Sandy Bridge-EN (2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-3240 scores 2,352 against the Xeon E5-2403's 2,367 — a 0.6% lead for the Xeon E5-2403. L3 cache: 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-3240 vs 10240 kB (total) on the Xeon E5-2403.

Feature	Core i3-3240	Xeon E5-2403
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz+89%	1.8 GHz
Base Clock	3.4 GHz+89%	1.8 GHz
L3 Cache	3 MB (total)	10240 kB (total)+233%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Sandy Bridge-EN (2012)
PassMark	2,352	2,367

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-3240 uses the LGA1155 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-2403 uses LGA1356 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.