Core i3-7020U vs Xeon X3380

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 i3-7020U vs Xeon X3380 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 i3-7020U vs Xeon X3380: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-7020U

2018

Why buy it

✅Draws 15W instead of 95W, a 80W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon X3380 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (2,567 vs 2,568).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 12 MB).

Xeon X3380

2009

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +11.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+300% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 3 MB).

Trade-offs

❌533.3% higher power demand at 95W vs 15W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon X3380 better than Core i3-7020U?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon X3380 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i3-7020U 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 X3380 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 11.8% 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 X3380 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0% better PassMark. It also has the larger cache pool with 300% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 3 MB).

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

Xeon X3380 still makes the most sense overall. Xeon X3380 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 11.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Core i3-7020U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2018 vs 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i3-7020U vs Xeon X3380 Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-7020U

The Core i3-7020U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 10 April 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.3 GHz, with boost up to 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 2,567 points. Launch price was $281.

Xeon X3380

The Xeon X3380 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. Base frequency: 3.16 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB L2 Cache. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 2,568 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-7020U is built on the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture. In PassMark, the Core i3-7020U scores 2,567 against the Xeon X3380's 2,568 — a 0% lead for the Xeon X3380. L3 cache: 3 MB on the Core i3-7020U vs 12 MB L2 Cache on the Xeon X3380.

Feature	Core i3-7020U	Xeon X3380
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	—
Boost Clock	2.3 GHz	—
Base Clock	2.3 GHz	3.16 GHz+37%
L3 Cache	3 MB	12 MB L2 Cache+300%
L2 Cache	512 kB	—
Process	14 nm-69%	45 nm
Architecture	Kaby Lake (2016−2019)	—
PassMark	2,567	2,568

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-7020U uses the BGA1356 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon X3380 uses LGA775 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.