Core i7-2630QM vs Xeon E5620

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 i7-2630QM vs Xeon E5620 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 i7-2630QM vs Xeon E5620: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i7-2630QM

2011

Why buy it

✅Draws 45W instead of 80W, a 35W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics 3000, while Xeon E5620 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5620 across 34 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (3,550 vs 3,621).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 12 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $378 MSRP, while Xeon E5620 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Xeon E5620

2010

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.8% higher average FPS across 34 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB).

Trade-offs

❌77.8% higher power demand at 80W vs 45W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-2630QM can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E5620 better than Core i7-2630QM?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5620 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-2630QM 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 E5620 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 4.8% more average FPS across 34 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E5620 is the stronger fit. You are getting 2% 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 E5620 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Xeon E5620 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $378 MSRP, and it still gives you a 4.8% average FPS lead across 34 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i7-2630QM only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2011 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (9.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on PGA988.

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

Core i7-2630QM makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2010). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i7-2630QM vs Xeon E5620 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-2630QM

The Core i7-2630QM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 3,550 points. Launch price was $378.

Xeon E5620

The Xeon E5620 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 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.66 GHz. L3 cache: 12 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: 3,621 points. Launch price was $35.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i7-2630QM and Xeon E5620 share an identical 4-core/8-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.9 GHz on the Core i7-2630QM versus 2.66 GHz on the Xeon E5620 — a 8.6% clock advantage for the Core i7-2630QM (base: 2 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Core i7-2630QM uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Xeon E5620 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-2630QM scores 3,550 against the Xeon E5620's 3,621 — a 2% lead for the Xeon E5620. L3 cache: 6 MB (total) on the Core i7-2630QM vs 12 MB (total) on the Xeon E5620.

Feature	Core i7-2630QM	Xeon E5620
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 8
Boost Clock	2.9 GHz+9%	2.66 GHz
Base Clock	2 GHz	2.4 GHz+20%
L3 Cache	6 MB (total)	12 MB (total)+100%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	3,550	3,621+2%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-2630QM uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Xeon E5620 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-2630QM	Xeon E5620
Socket	PGA988	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	32	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (Core i7-2630QM) / not specified (Xeon E5620). The Core i7-2630QM includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 3000), while the Xeon E5620 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Core i7-2630QM rivals AMD A8-3510MX.