
Core i5-4670K

Xeon E3-1280
Core i5-4670K vs Xeon E3-1280 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 i5-4670K vs Xeon E3-1280 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 i5-4670K vs Xeon E3-1280: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
Core i5-4670K
2013Why buy it
- β Draws 84W instead of 95W, a 11W reduction.
- β 100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- β Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 4600, while Xeon E3-1280 needs a discrete GPU.
- β Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon E3-1280.
Trade-offs
- βWorse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E3-1280 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- βLower PassMark (5,584 vs 5,612).
- βSmaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 8 MB).
- βLess compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E3-1280, which brings 4 cores / 8 threads.
- βLaunch MSRP is still $328 MSRP, while Xeon E3-1280 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Xeon E3-1280
2011Why buy it
- β Better for gaming: +8.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- β +33.3% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB).
- β Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 8 threads.
Trade-offs
- βNo integrated graphics, while Core i5-4670K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
- βNo boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-4670K.
Quick Answers
So, is Xeon E3-1280 better than Core i5-4670K?
Which one is better for gaming?
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 i5-4670K vs Xeon E3-1280 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i5-4670K
The Core i5-4670K is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 June 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013β2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 6144 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 84 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 5,584 points. Launch price was $266.

Xeon E3-1280
The Xeon E3-1280 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 April 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011β2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 5,612 points. Launch price was $450.
Processing Power
The Core i5-4670K packs 4 cores / 4 threads, matching the Xeon E3-1280's 4 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the Core i5-4670K versus 3.9 GHz on the Xeon E3-1280 β a 2.6% clock advantage for the Xeon E3-1280 (base: 3.4 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Core i5-4670K uses the Haswell (2013β2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Xeon E3-1280 uses Sandy Bridge (2011β2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-4670K scores 5,584 against the Xeon E3-1280's 5,612 β a 0.5% lead for the Xeon E3-1280. L3 cache: 6144 kB (total) on the Core i5-4670K vs 8 MB (total) on the Xeon E3-1280.
| Feature | Core i5-4670K | Xeon E3-1280 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4 | 4 / 8 |
| Boost Clock | 3.8 GHz | 3.9 GHz+3% |
| Base Clock | 3.4 GHz | 3.5 GHz+3% |
| L3 Cache | 6144 kB (total) | 8 MB (total)+33% |
| L2 Cache | 256 kB (per core) | 256 kB (per core) |
| Process | 22 nm-31% | 32 nm |
| Architecture | Haswell (2013β2015) | Sandy Bridge (2011β2013) |
| PassMark | 5,584 | 5,612 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 975 | β |
Memory & Platform
The Core i5-4670K uses the LGA1150 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E3-1280 uses LGA1155 (PCIe 2.0) β making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i5-4670K | Xeon E3-1280 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1150 | LGA1155 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+50% | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1600 | β |
| Max RAM Capacity | 32 GB | β |
| RAM Channels | 2 | β |
| ECC Support | No | β |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | β |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x, EPT (Core i5-4670K) / not specified (Xeon E3-1280). The Core i5-4670K includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 4600), while the Xeon E3-1280 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-4670K targets Gaming Desktop. Direct competitor: Core i5-4670K rivals FX-9370.
| Feature | Core i5-4670K | Xeon E3-1280 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | β |
| IGPU Model | HD Graphics 4600 | β |
| Unlocked | Yes | β |
| AVX-512 | No | β |
| Virtualization | VT-x, EPT | β |
| Target Use | Gaming Desktop | β |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.














