Core i5-3340M vs Xeon E5607

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 i5-3340M vs Xeon E5607 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 i5-3340M vs Xeon E5607: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i5-3340M

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics 4000, while Xeon E5607 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 8 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5607, which brings 4 cores / 4 threads.
❌540% higher power demand at 512W vs 80W.

Xeon E5607

2011

Why buy it

✅+166.7% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 3 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 4 threads.
✅Draws 80W instead of 512W, a 432W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i5-3340M across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (2,686 vs 2,692).
❌Launch MSRP is still $135 MSRP, while Core i5-3340M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-3340M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-3340M better than Xeon E5607?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5607 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i5-3340M is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i5-3340M is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.6% 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, Core i5-3340M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i5-3340M is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon E5607 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. Core i5-3340M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $135 MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Xeon E5607 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (19.9 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

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

Core i5-3340M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2011) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i5-3340M vs Xeon E5607 Technical Specifications

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

Core i5-3340M

The Core i5-3340M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,692 points. Launch price was $225.

Xeon E5607

The Xeon E5607 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 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.26 GHz, with boost up to 0.27 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1366. Thermal design power (TDP): 80 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,686 points. Launch price was $135.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-3340M packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the Xeon E5607 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Xeon E5607 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.4 GHz on the Core i5-3340M versus 0.27 GHz on the Xeon E5607 — a 170.6% clock advantage for the Core i5-3340M (base: 2.7 GHz vs 2.26 GHz). The Core i5-3340M uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Xeon E5607 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-3340M scores 2,692 against the Xeon E5607's 2,686 — a 0.2% lead for the Core i5-3340M. L3 cache: 3 MB (total) on the Core i5-3340M vs 8 MB (total) on the Xeon E5607.

Feature	Core i5-3340M	Xeon E5607
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz+1159%	0.27 GHz
Base Clock	2.7 GHz+19%	2.26 GHz
L3 Cache	3 MB (total)	8 MB (total)+167%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	2,692	2,686

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-3340M uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5607 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i5-3340M	Xeon E5607
Socket	PGA988	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3/L/-RS 1333/1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x / VT-d / EPT (Core i5-3340M) / not specified (Xeon E5607). The Core i5-3340M includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 4000), while the Xeon E5607 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-3340M targets Professional Laptop. Direct competitor: Core i5-3340M rivals AMD A10-4600M.