Core i3-8100H vs Xeon X5647

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 i3-8100H vs Xeon X5647 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 i3-8100H vs Xeon X5647: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-8100H

2018

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 130W, a 129W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon X5647 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon X5647 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (4,435 vs 4,441).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 12 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon X5647, which brings 4 cores / 8 threads.

Xeon X5647

2011

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +14.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 8 threads.

Trade-offs

❌12900% higher power demand at 130W vs 1W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-8100H can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon X5647 better than Core i3-8100H?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon X5647 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i3-8100H 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 X5647 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 14.8% 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 X5647 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB).

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

Xeon X5647 still makes the most sense overall. Xeon X5647 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 14.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Core i3-8100H makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2018 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i3-8100H vs Xeon X5647 Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-8100H

The Core i3-8100H is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 July 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Coffee Lake-H (2018−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1440. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 4,435 points. Launch price was $225.

Xeon X5647

The Xeon X5647 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 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.93 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (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: 4,441 points. Launch price was $175.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-8100H packs 4 cores / 4 threads, matching the Xeon X5647's 4 cores. Boost clocks reach 3 GHz on the Core i3-8100H versus 3.2 GHz on the Xeon X5647 — a 6.5% clock advantage for the Xeon X5647 (base: 3 GHz vs 2.93 GHz). The Core i3-8100H uses the Coffee Lake-H (2018−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon X5647 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-8100H scores 4,435 against the Xeon X5647's 4,441 — a 0.1% lead for the Xeon X5647. L3 cache: 6 MB on the Core i3-8100H vs 12 MB (total) on the Xeon X5647.

Feature	Core i3-8100H	Xeon X5647
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 8
Boost Clock	3 GHz	3.2 GHz+7%
Base Clock	3 GHz+2%	2.93 GHz
L3 Cache	6 MB	12 MB (total)+100%
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Coffee Lake-H (2018−2019)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	4,435	4,441

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-8100H uses the BGA1440 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon X5647 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Core i3-8100H versus DDR3-1066 on the Xeon X5647 — the Core i3-8100H supports 150.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i3-8100H) vs 3 (Xeon X5647).

Feature	Core i3-8100H	Xeon X5647
Socket	BGA1440	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666+150%	DDR3-1066
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 virtualization. The Core i3-8100H includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the Xeon X5647 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-8100H targets Mobile, Xeon X5647 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Xeon X5647 rivals Core i7-980X.