Core i3-4110M vs Xeon E5607

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 i3-4110M vs Xeon E5607 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 i3-4110M vs Xeon E5607: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-4110M

2014

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 4600, while Xeon E5607 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,678 vs 2,686).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 8 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5607, which brings 4 cores / 4 threads.
❌540% higher power demand at 512W vs 80W.

Xeon E5607

2011

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.
✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 3 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 4 threads.
✅Draws 80W instead of 512W, a 432W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $135 MSRP, while Core i3-4110M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-4110M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E5607 better than Core i3-4110M?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5607 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i3-4110M 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 E5607 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 E5607 is the better buy right now. Xeon E5607 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $135 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.3% better PassMark. The compromise is that Core i3-4110M is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 1.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (19.9 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core i3-4110M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i3-4110M vs Xeon E5607 Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-4110M

The Core i3-4110M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 April 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA946. Thermal design power (TDP): 37 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,678 points. Launch price was $225.

Xeon E5607

The Xeon E5607 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 February 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Westmere-EP (2010−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.26 GHz, with boost up to 0.27 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1366. Thermal design power (TDP): 80 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,686 points. Launch price was $135.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-4110M packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the Xeon E5607 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Xeon E5607 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Core i3-4110M versus 0.27 GHz on the Xeon E5607 — a 162.4% clock advantage for the Core i3-4110M (base: 2.6 GHz vs 2.26 GHz). The Core i3-4110M uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Xeon E5607 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-4110M scores 2,678 against the Xeon E5607's 2,686 — a 0.3% lead for the Xeon E5607. L3 cache: 3 MB on the Core i3-4110M vs 8 MB (total) on the Xeon E5607.

Feature	Core i3-4110M	Xeon E5607
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2.6 GHz+863%	0.27 GHz
Base Clock	2.6 GHz+15%	2.26 GHz
L3 Cache	3 MB	8 MB (total)+167%
L2 Cache	512 kB+100%	256 kB (per core)
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	2,678	2,686

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-4110M uses the PGA946 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5607 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i3-4110M	Xeon E5607
Socket	PGA946	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i3-4110M) / not specified (Xeon E5607). The Core i3-4110M includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 4600), while the Xeon E5607 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-4110M targets Mobile.