Core i3-7100H 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 i3-7100H 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 i3-7100H 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 i3-7100H

2017

Why buy it

✅+0.1% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 35W instead of 130W, a 95W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 630, while Xeon X5698 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon X5698 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 12 MB).

Xeon X5698

2011

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+300% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 3 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,447 vs 3,450).
❌271.4% higher power demand at 130W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-7100H can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-7100H 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 i3-7100H 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 i3-7100H is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i3-7100H still makes the most sense overall. Core i3-7100H comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.1% better PassMark.

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

Core i3-7100H makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 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 i3-7100H vs Xeon X5698 Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-7100H

The Core i3-7100H is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake-H (2017) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1440. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 3,450 points. Launch price was $393.

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 i3-7100H and Xeon X5698 share an identical 2-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Core i3-7100H versus 4.4 GHz on the Xeon X5698 — a 44.4% clock advantage for the Xeon X5698 (base: 3 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The Core i3-7100H uses the Kaby Lake-H (2017) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon X5698 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-7100H scores 3,450 against the Xeon X5698's 3,447 — a 0.1% lead for the Core i3-7100H. L3 cache: 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-7100H vs 12288 kB (total) on the Xeon X5698.

Feature	Core i3-7100H	Xeon X5698
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.8 GHz	4.4 GHz+57%
Base Clock	3 GHz	4.4 GHz+47%
L3 Cache	3 MB (total)	12288 kB (total)+300%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Kaby Lake-H (2017)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	3,450	3,447
Geekbench 6 Single	1,011	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-7100H uses the BGA1440 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon X5698 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2400 on the Core i3-7100H versus DDR3-1333 on the Xeon X5698 — the Core i3-7100H supports 80% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i3-7100H) vs 3 (Xeon X5698). Chipset compatibility: HM175,QM175,CM238 (Core i3-7100H) and Intel X58,Intel 5520 (Xeon X5698).

Feature	Core i3-7100H	Xeon X5698
Socket	BGA1440	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2400+80%	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	3+50%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support VT-x, VT-d, EPT virtualization. The Core i3-7100H includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 630), while the Xeon X5698 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-7100H targets Performance Laptop, Xeon X5698 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Core i3-7100H rivals Ryzen 3 2300U; Xeon X5698 rivals Core i7-980X.

Feature	Core i3-7100H	Xeon X5698
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	HD Graphics 630	—
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d, EPT	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	Performance Laptop	Workstation