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 i7-3770T vs Xeon X5687 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 i7-3770T vs Xeon X5687: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i7-3770T

2012

Why buy it

✅Costs $274 less on MSRP ($278 MSRP vs $552 MSRP).
✅Delivers 99.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 19.4 vs 9.8 PassMark/$ ($278 MSRP vs $552 MSRP).
✅Draws 45W instead of 130W, a 85W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics 4000, while Xeon X5687 needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon X5687.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (850 vs 1,643).
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (2,859 vs 5,386).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 12 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon X5687, which brings 4 cores / 8 threads and 36 PCIe lanes.

Xeon X5687

2011

Why buy it

✅+93.3% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 8 threads, plus 36 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅125% more PCIe lanes (36 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 9.8 vs 19.4 PassMark/$ ($552 MSRP vs $278 MSRP).
❌188.9% higher power demand at 130W vs 45W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-3770T can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i7-3770T.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon X5687 better than Core i7-3770T?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon X5687 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-3770T 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 X5687 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.0% 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 X5687 is the stronger fit. You are getting 88.4% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).

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

Xeon X5687 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Xeon X5687 comes in 98.6% more expensive on MSRP at $552 MSRP versus $278 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i7-3770T only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2012 platform. Even with 99.2% better value on paper (19.4 vs 9.8 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA1155.

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

Core i7-3770T makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i7-3770T vs Xeon X5687 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-3770T

The Core i7-3770T 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 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 8192 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 5,403 points. Launch price was $330.

Xeon X5687

The Xeon X5687 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 February 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Westmere-EP (2010−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 3.86 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1366. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 5,386 points. Launch price was $121.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i7-3770T and Xeon X5687 share an identical 4-core/8-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the Core i7-3770T versus 3.86 GHz on the Xeon X5687 — a 4.2% clock advantage for the Xeon X5687 (base: 2.5 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The Core i7-3770T uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Xeon X5687 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-3770T scores 5,403 against the Xeon X5687's 5,386 — a 0.3% lead for the Core i7-3770T. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 850 vs 1,643, a 63.6% lead for the Xeon X5687 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 2,859 vs 5,386 (61.3% advantage for the Xeon X5687). L3 cache: 8192 kB (total) on the Core i7-3770T vs 12 MB (total) on the Xeon X5687.

Feature	Core i7-3770T	Xeon X5687
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 8
Boost Clock	3.7 GHz	3.86 GHz+4%
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	3.6 GHz+44%
L3 Cache	8192 kB (total)	12 MB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	5,403	5,386
Geekbench 6 Single	850	1,643+93%
Geekbench 6 Multi	2,859	5,386+88%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-3770T uses the LGA1155 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon X5687 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the Core i7-3770T versus DDR3-1333 on the Xeon X5687 — the Core i7-3770T supports 20% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon X5687 supports up to 288 GB of RAM compared to 32 GB — 800% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i7-3770T) vs 3 (Xeon X5687). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-3770T) vs 36 (Xeon X5687) — the Xeon X5687 offers 20 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H61,H67,P67,Z68,B75,H77,Z75,Z77 (Core i7-3770T) and X58 (Xeon X5687).

Feature	Core i7-3770T	Xeon X5687
Socket	LGA1155	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600+20%	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	288 GB+800%
RAM Channels	2	3+50%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	36+125%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: Yes (Core i7-3770T) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon X5687). The Core i7-3770T includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 4000), while the Xeon X5687 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Xeon X5687 targets Server.

Feature	Core i7-3770T	Xeon X5687
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Intel HD Graphics 4000	—
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	Yes	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	—	Server

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i7-3770T was priced at $278, while the Xeon X5687 came in at $552. On launch pricing ($278 vs $552), Core i7-3770T was $274 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-3770T delivers 19.4 pts/$ vs 9.8 pts/$ for the Xeon X5687 — making the Core i7-3770T the 66.3% better value option.

Feature	Core i7-3770T	Xeon X5687
MSRP	$278-50%	$552
Performance per Dollar	19.4+98%	9.8
Release Date	2012	2011

Search Core i7-3770T on Amazon

Search Xeon X5687 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.