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 i3-8300 vs Xeon X5675 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 i3-8300 vs Xeon X5675: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-8300

2018

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,302 less on MSRP ($138 MSRP vs $1,440 MSRP).
✅Delivers 935.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 46.2 vs 4.5 PassMark/$ ($138 MSRP vs $1,440 MSRP).
✅Draws 62W instead of 95W, a 33W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 630, while Xeon X5675 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon X5675 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (6,370 vs 6,418).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 12 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon X5675, which brings 6 cores / 12 threads.

Xeon X5675

2011

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.4% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 6 cores / 12 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 4.5 vs 46.2 PassMark/$ ($1,440 MSRP vs $138 MSRP).
❌53.2% higher power demand at 95W vs 62W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-8300 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i3-8300.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon X5675 better than Core i3-8300?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon X5675 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i3-8300 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 X5675 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 5.4% 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 X5675 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).

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

Xeon X5675 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Xeon X5675 comes in 943.5% more expensive on MSRP at $1,440 MSRP versus $138 MSRP, and it still gives you a 5.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i3-8300 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2018 platform. Even with 935.7% better value on paper (46.2 vs 4.5 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA1151.

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

Core i3-8300 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 i3-8300 vs Xeon X5675 Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-8300

The Core i3-8300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 February 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Coffee Lake (2017−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 62 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 6,370 points. Launch price was $138.

Xeon X5675

The Xeon X5675 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 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.06 GHz, with boost up to 3.46 GHz. L3 cache: 12288 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1366. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,418 points. Launch price was $162.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-8300 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Xeon X5675 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Xeon X5675 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the Core i3-8300 versus 3.46 GHz on the Xeon X5675 — a 6.7% clock advantage for the Core i3-8300 (base: 3.7 GHz vs 3.06 GHz). The Core i3-8300 uses the Coffee Lake (2017−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon X5675 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-8300 scores 6,370 against the Xeon X5675's 6,418 — a 0.8% lead for the Xeon X5675. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core i3-8300 vs 12288 kB (total) on the Xeon X5675.

Feature	Core i3-8300	Xeon X5675
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	6 / 12+50%
Boost Clock	3.7 GHz+7%	3.46 GHz
Base Clock	3.7 GHz+21%	3.06 GHz
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	12288 kB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Coffee Lake (2017−2019)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	6,370	6,418
Geekbench 6 Single	1,327	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-8300 uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon X5675 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2400 on the Core i3-8300 versus DDR3-1333 on the Xeon X5675 — the Core i3-8300 supports 80% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i3-8300) vs 3 (Xeon X5675). Chipset compatibility: H310,B360,H370,Q370,Z370,Z390 (Core i3-8300) and Intel X58,Intel 5520 (Xeon X5675).

Feature	Core i3-8300	Xeon X5675
Socket	LGA1151	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	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support VT-x, VT-d, EPT virtualization. The Core i3-8300 includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 630), while the Xeon X5675 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-8300 targets Mainstream Desktop, Xeon X5675 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Core i3-8300 rivals Ryzen 3 2300X; Xeon X5675 rivals Core i7-980X.

Feature	Core i3-8300	Xeon X5675
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	UHD Graphics 630	—
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d, EPT	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	Mainstream Desktop	Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i3-8300 was priced at $138, while the Xeon X5675 came in at $1440. On launch pricing ($138 vs $1440), Core i3-8300 was $1302 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i3-8300 delivers 46.2 pts/$ vs 4.5 pts/$ for the Xeon X5675 — making the Core i3-8300 the 164.8% better value option.

Feature	Core i3-8300	Xeon X5675
MSRP	$138-90%	$1440
Performance per Dollar	46.2+927%	4.5
Release Date	2018	2011

Search Core i3-8300 on Amazon

Search Xeon X5675 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.