Core i7-3970X vs Xeon E3-1240 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 i7-3970X vs Xeon E3-1240 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 i7-3970X vs Xeon E3-1240 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 i7-3970X

2012

Why buy it

✅+87.5% larger total L3 cache (15 MB vs 8 MB).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (8,554 vs 8,731).
❌Launch MSRP is still $990 MSRP, while Xeon E3-1240 v6 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌108.3% higher power demand at 150W vs 72W.

Xeon E3-1240 v6

2017

Why buy it

✅Draws 72W instead of 150W, a 78W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 15 MB).

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E3-1240 v6 better than Core i7-3970X?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E3-1240 v6 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-3970X 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 E3-1240 v6 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.6% 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 E3-1240 v6 is the stronger fit. You are getting 2.1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads.

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

Xeon E3-1240 v6 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Xeon E3-1240 v6 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $990 MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i7-3970X only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2012 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (8.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA2011.

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

Xeon E3-1240 v6 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2012) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 8 threads instead of 6/12. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i7-3970X vs Xeon E3-1240 v6 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-3970X

The Core i7-3970X is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 November 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge-E (2011−2013) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 15 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 150 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 8,554 points. Launch price was $593.

Xeon E3-1240 v6

The Xeon E3-1240 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 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 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: 8,731 points. Launch price was $272.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-3970X packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Xeon E3-1240 v6 offers 4 cores / 8 threads — the Core i7-3970X has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the Core i7-3970X versus 4.1 GHz on the Xeon E3-1240 v6 — a 2.5% clock advantage for the Xeon E3-1240 v6 (base: 3.5 GHz vs 3.7 GHz). The Core i7-3970X uses the Sandy Bridge-E (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Xeon E3-1240 v6 uses Kaby Lake (2016−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-3970X scores 8,554 against the Xeon E3-1240 v6's 8,731 — a 2% lead for the Xeon E3-1240 v6. L3 cache: 15 MB (total) on the Core i7-3970X vs 8 MB on the Xeon E3-1240 v6.

Feature	Core i7-3970X	Xeon E3-1240 v6
Cores / Threads	6 / 12+50%	4 / 8
Boost Clock	4 GHz	4.1 GHz+2%
Base Clock	3.5 GHz	3.7 GHz+6%
L3 Cache	15 MB (total)+88%	8 MB
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	1 MB+300%
Process	32 nm	14 nm-56%
Architecture	Sandy Bridge-E (2011−2013)	Kaby Lake (2016−2019)
PassMark	8,554	8,731+2%
Geekbench 6 Single	742	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-3970X uses the LGA2011 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Xeon E3-1240 v6 uses LGA1151 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-3970X	Xeon E3-1240 v6
Socket	LGA2011	LGA1151
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB	—
RAM Channels	4	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	40	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i7-3970X) / not specified (Xeon E3-1240 v6). Primary use case: Core i7-3970X targets HEDT Desktop. Direct competitor: Core i7-3970X rivals FX-9590.