
Core i3-7102E

Xeon X3380
Core i3-7102E vs Xeon X3380 Performance Spectrum
About PassMark
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 i3-7102E 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.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant

Among Us

Apex Legends

ARC Raiders

Baldur's Gate 3

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Core i3-7102E 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 i3-7102E
2017Why buy it
- ✅+1.2% higher PassMark.
- ✅Draws 25W instead of 95W, a 70W reduction.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics 630, while Xeon X3380 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon X3380 across 47 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 12 MB).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $225 MSRP, while Xeon X3380 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Xeon X3380
2009Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +9.3% higher average FPS across 47 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+300% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 3 MB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (2,568 vs 2,599).
- ❌280% higher power demand at 95W vs 25W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-7102E can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i3-7102E better than Xeon X3380?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Core i3-7102E vs Xeon X3380 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i3-7102E
The Core i3-7102E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Max frequency: 2.1 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 2,599 points. Launch price was $225.

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 i3-7102E is built on the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture. In PassMark, the Core i3-7102E scores 2,599 against the Xeon X3380's 2,568 — a 1.2% lead for the Core i3-7102E. L3 cache: 3 MB on the Core i3-7102E vs 12 MB L2 Cache on the Xeon X3380.
| Feature | Core i3-7102E | Xeon X3380 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 4 | — |
| Boost Clock | 2.1 GHz | — |
| Base Clock | — | 3.16 GHz |
| 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 | 2,599+1% | 2,568 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 659 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,962 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 1,898 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: Yes (Core i3-7102E) / not specified (Xeon X3380). The Core i3-7102E includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 630), while the Xeon X3380 requires a dedicated GPU.
| Feature | Core i3-7102E | Xeon X3380 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | — |
| IGPU Model | Intel HD Graphics 630 | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | Yes | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













