Core i7-3635QM 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 i7-3635QM 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 i7-3635QM 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 i7-3635QM

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 45W instead of 95W, a 50W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 12 MB).

Xeon X5667

2010

Why buy it

✅+100% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-3635QM across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (4,697 vs 4,728).
❌111.1% higher power demand at 95W vs 45W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-3635QM better than Xeon X5667?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon X5667 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-3635QM 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 i7-3635QM is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.1% 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 i7-3635QM is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads.

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

Core i7-3635QM still makes the most sense overall. Core i7-3635QM comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Core i7-3635QM makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2010) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 8 threads instead of 4/8. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i7-3635QM vs Xeon X5667 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-3635QM

The Core i7-3635QM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1224. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 4,728 points. Launch price was $69.

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

Both the Core i7-3635QM and Xeon X5667 share an identical 4-core/8-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.4 GHz on the Core i7-3635QM versus 3.46 GHz on the Xeon X5667 — a 1.7% clock advantage for the Xeon X5667 (base: 2.4 GHz vs 3.06 GHz). The Core i7-3635QM uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Xeon X5667 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-3635QM scores 4,728 against the Xeon X5667's 4,697 — a 0.7% lead for the Core i7-3635QM. L3 cache: 6 MB (total) on the Core i7-3635QM vs 12 MB (total) on the Xeon X5667.

Feature	Core i7-3635QM	Xeon X5667
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 8
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz	3.46 GHz+2%
Base Clock	2.4 GHz	3.06 GHz+28%
L3 Cache	6 MB (total)	12 MB (total)+100%
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	4,728	4,697

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-3635QM uses the FCBGA1224 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon X5667 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-3635QM	Xeon X5667
Socket	FCBGA1224	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR3-1333
RAM Channels	—	3
ECC Support	—	Yes

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Core i7-3635QM) / VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon X5667). Primary use case: Xeon X5667 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Xeon X5667 rivals Core i7-980X.