Core i3-4330 vs Xeon X5698

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 i3-4330 vs Xeon X5698 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 i3-4330 vs Xeon X5698: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-4330

2013

Why buy it

✅+1% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 54W instead of 130W, a 76W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 4600, while Xeon X5698 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (4 MB vs 12 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $138 MSRP, while Xeon X5698 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Xeon X5698

2011

Why buy it

✅+200% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 4 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,447 vs 3,482).
❌140.7% higher power demand at 130W vs 54W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-4330 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-4330 better than Xeon X5698?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon X5698 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i3-4330 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 i3-4330 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i3-4330 is the better buy right now. Core i3-4330 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $138 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 1% better PassMark. The compromise is that Xeon X5698 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 2.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (25.2 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 i3-4330 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2011) and more multi-core headroom with 2 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 i3-4330 vs Xeon X5698 Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-4330

The Core i3-4330 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 54 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,482 points. Launch price was $171.

Xeon X5698

The Xeon X5698 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Westmere-EP (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 4.4 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 GHz. L3 cache: 12288 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1366. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,447 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i3-4330 and Xeon X5698 share an identical 2-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.5 GHz on the Core i3-4330 versus 4.4 GHz on the Xeon X5698 — a 22.8% clock advantage for the Xeon X5698 (base: 3.5 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The Core i3-4330 uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Xeon X5698 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-4330 scores 3,482 against the Xeon X5698's 3,447 — a 1% lead for the Core i3-4330. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Core i3-4330 vs 12288 kB (total) on the Xeon X5698.

Feature	Core i3-4330	Xeon X5698
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 4
Boost Clock	3.5 GHz	4.4 GHz+26%
Base Clock	3.5 GHz	4.4 GHz+26%
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	12288 kB (total)+200%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	3,482+1%	3,447

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-4330 uses the LGA1150 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon X5698 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the Core i3-4330 versus DDR3-1333 on the Xeon X5698 — the Core i3-4330 supports 20% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i3-4330) vs 3 (Xeon X5698).

Feature	Core i3-4330	Xeon X5698
Socket	LGA1150	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600+20%	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	3+50%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i3-4330) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon X5698). The Core i3-4330 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 4600), while the Xeon X5698 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-4330 targets Desktop, Xeon X5698 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Xeon X5698 rivals Core i7-980X.