Core i5-6300HQ vs Xeon X5667

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 i5-6300HQ vs Xeon X5667 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 i5-6300HQ vs Xeon X5667: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i5-6300HQ

2015

Why buy it

✅Draws 45W instead of 95W, a 50W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 530, while Xeon X5667 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon X5667 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (4,672 vs 4,697).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 12 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon X5667, which brings 4 cores / 8 threads.

Xeon X5667

2010

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +14.9% 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

❌111.1% higher power demand at 95W vs 45W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-6300HQ can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon X5667 better than Core i5-6300HQ?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon X5667 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i5-6300HQ 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 X5667 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 14.9% 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 X5667 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.5% 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 X5667 still makes the most sense overall. Xeon X5667 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 14.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Core i5-6300HQ makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2010). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i5-6300HQ vs Xeon X5667 Technical Specifications

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

Core i5-6300HQ

The Core i5-6300HQ is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.3 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 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: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 4,672 points. Launch price was $250.

Xeon X5667

The Xeon X5667 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 16 March 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Westmere-EP (2010−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.06 GHz, with boost up to 3.46 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (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: 4,697 points. Launch price was $80.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-6300HQ packs 4 cores / 4 threads, matching the Xeon X5667's 4 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the Core i5-6300HQ versus 3.46 GHz on the Xeon X5667 — a 7.8% clock advantage for the Xeon X5667 (base: 2.3 GHz vs 3.06 GHz). The Core i5-6300HQ uses the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon X5667 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-6300HQ scores 4,672 against the Xeon X5667's 4,697 — a 0.5% lead for the Xeon X5667. L3 cache: 6 MB on the Core i5-6300HQ vs 12 MB (total) on the Xeon X5667.

Feature	Core i5-6300HQ	Xeon X5667
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 8
Boost Clock	3.2 GHz	3.46 GHz+8%
Base Clock	2.3 GHz	3.06 GHz+33%
L3 Cache	6 MB	12 MB (total)+100%
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Skylake (2015−2016)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	4,672	4,697
Geekbench 6 Single	1,000	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-6300HQ uses the BGA1440 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon X5667 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2133 on the Core i5-6300HQ versus DDR3-1333 on the Xeon X5667 — the Core i5-6300HQ supports 60% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-6300HQ) vs 3 (Xeon X5667). Chipset compatibility: HM170,QM170 (Core i5-6300HQ) and Intel X58,Intel 5520 (Xeon X5667).

Feature	Core i5-6300HQ	Xeon X5667
Socket	BGA1440	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2133+60%	DDR3-1333
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, EPT virtualization. The Core i5-6300HQ includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 530), while the Xeon X5667 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-6300HQ targets Gaming Laptop, Xeon X5667 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Core i5-6300HQ rivals A12-9730P; Xeon X5667 rivals Core i7-980X.