Core i7-3615QE vs Xeon E3-1220 v6

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 i7-3615QE vs Xeon E3-1220 v6 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 i7-3615QE vs Xeon E3-1220 v6: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i7-3615QE

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +14.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 45W instead of 72W, a 27W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 8 MB).
❌
7.5% HIGHER MSRP
$400 MSRPvs$372 MSRP

Xeon E3-1220 v6

2017

Why buy it

✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB).
✅Costs $28 less on MSRP ($372 MSRP vs $400 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-3615QE across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (5,589 vs 5,617).
❌60% higher power demand at 72W vs 45W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-3615QE better than Xeon E3-1220 v6?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E3-1220 v6 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-3615QE 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 i7-3615QE is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 14.8% 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 i7-3615QE is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.5% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads.

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

Core i7-3615QE is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon E3-1220 v6 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. Core i7-3615QE comes in 7.5% more expensive on MSRP at $400 MSRP versus $372 MSRP, and it still gives you a 14.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Xeon E3-1220 v6 is also 7.0% better value on MSRP (15.0 vs 14.0 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

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

Xeon E3-1220 v6 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2012) and 33.3% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i7-3615QE vs Xeon E3-1220 v6 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-3615QE

The Core i7-3615QE is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 29 April 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.3 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 6144 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: unknown Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 5,617 points. Launch price was $149.

Xeon E3-1220 v6

The Xeon E3-1220 v6 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 28 March 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 72 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400, DDR3L-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 5,589 points. Launch price was $193.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-3615QE packs 4 cores / 8 threads, matching the Xeon E3-1220 v6's 4 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.3 GHz on the Core i7-3615QE versus 3.5 GHz on the Xeon E3-1220 v6 — a 5.9% clock advantage for the Xeon E3-1220 v6 (base: 2.3 GHz vs 3 GHz). The Core i7-3615QE uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Xeon E3-1220 v6 uses Kaby Lake (2016−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-3615QE scores 5,617 against the Xeon E3-1220 v6's 5,589 — a 0.5% lead for the Core i7-3615QE. L3 cache: 6144 kB (total) on the Core i7-3615QE vs 8 MB on the Xeon E3-1220 v6.

Feature	Core i7-3615QE	Xeon E3-1220 v6
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 4
Boost Clock	3.3 GHz	3.5 GHz+6%
Base Clock	2.3 GHz	3 GHz+30%
L3 Cache	6144 kB (total)	8 MB+33%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	1 MB+300%
Process	22 nm	14 nm-36%
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Kaby Lake (2016−2019)
PassMark	5,617	5,589

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-3615QE uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E3-1220 v6 uses LGA1151 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-3615QE	Xeon E3-1220 v6
Socket	BGA1023	LGA1151
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i7-3615QE was priced at $400, while the Xeon E3-1220 v6 came in at $372. On launch pricing ($400 vs $372), Xeon E3-1220 v6 was $28 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-3615QE delivers 14.0 pts/$ vs 15.0 pts/$ for the Xeon E3-1220 v6 — making the Xeon E3-1220 v6 the 6.8% better value option.

Feature	Core i7-3615QE	Xeon E3-1220 v6
MSRP	$400	$372-7%
Performance per Dollar	14.0	15.0+7%
Release Date	2012	2017

Search Core i7-3615QE on Amazon

Search Xeon E3-1220 v6 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.