Core i7-3920XM vs Xeon E3-1205 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 i7-3920XM vs Xeon E3-1205 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 i7-3920XM vs Xeon E3-1205 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 i7-3920XM

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +22.4% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 4000, while Xeon E3-1205 v6 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Xeon E3-1205 v6

2017

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-3920XM across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (5,682 vs 5,713).
❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-3920XM can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-3920XM better than Xeon E3-1205 v6?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E3-1205 v6 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-3920XM 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 i7-3920XM is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 22.4% 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 i7-3920XM 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 i7-3920XM still makes the most sense overall. Core i7-3920XM comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 22.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Xeon E3-1205 v6 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2012). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i7-3920XM vs Xeon E3-1205 v6 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-3920XM

The Core i7-3920XM 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 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 5,713 points. Launch price was $1,096.

Xeon E3-1205 v6

The Xeon E3-1205 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 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400, DDR3L-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 5,682 points. Launch price was $193.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-3920XM packs 4 cores / 8 threads, matching the Xeon E3-1205 v6's 4 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the Core i7-3920XM versus 3 GHz on the Xeon E3-1205 v6 — a 23.5% clock advantage for the Core i7-3920XM (base: 2.9 GHz vs 3 GHz). The Core i7-3920XM uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Xeon E3-1205 v6 uses Kaby Lake (2016−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-3920XM scores 5,713 against the Xeon E3-1205 v6's 5,682 — a 0.5% lead for the Core i7-3920XM. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core i7-3920XM vs 8 MB on the Xeon E3-1205 v6.

Feature	Core i7-3920XM	Xeon E3-1205 v6
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 4
Boost Clock	3.8 GHz+27%	3 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz	3 GHz+3%
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	8 MB
L2 Cache	256K (per core)+25500%	1 MB
Process	22 nm	14 nm-36%
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Kaby Lake (2016−2019)
PassMark	5,713	5,682
Geekbench 6 Single	686	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-3920XM uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E3-1205 v6 uses LGA1151 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-3920XM	Xeon E3-1205 v6
Socket	PGA988	LGA1151
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i7-3920XM) / not specified (Xeon E3-1205 v6). The Core i7-3920XM includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 4000), while the Xeon E3-1205 v6 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-3920XM targets Extreme Performance Laptop. Direct competitor: Core i7-3920XM rivals A10-5750M.