Core i7-4810MQ vs Xeon E5-2630

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 i7-4810MQ vs Xeon E5-2630 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 i7-4810MQ vs Xeon E5-2630: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i7-4810MQ

2014

Why buy it

✅Costs $17 less on MSRP ($378 MSRP vs $395 MSRP).
✅Draws 47W instead of 95W, a 48W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (6,074 vs 6,077).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 15 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2630, which brings 6 cores / 12 threads.

Xeon E5-2630

2012

Why buy it

✅+0% higher PassMark.
✅+87.5% larger total L3 cache (15 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 6 cores / 12 threads.

Trade-offs

❌
4.5% HIGHER MSRP
$395 MSRPvs$378 MSRP
❌102.1% higher power demand at 95W vs 47W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-4810MQ better than Xeon E5-2630?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-2630 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-4810MQ is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E5-2630 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 87.5% larger total L3 cache (15 MB vs 8 MB).

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

Core i7-4810MQ is the better buy right now. Core i7-4810MQ comes in $17 cheaper on MSRP at $378 MSRP versus $395 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Xeon E5-2630 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0% better PassMark. It is also 4.4% better value on MSRP (16.1 vs 15.4 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core i7-4810MQ makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2012). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i7-4810MQ vs Xeon E5-2630 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-4810MQ

The Core i7-4810MQ is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 January 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 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: PGA946. Thermal design power (TDP): 47 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,074 points. Launch price was $378.

Xeon E5-2630

The Xeon E5-2630 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 6 March 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge-EP (2012) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.3 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 15360 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,077 points. Launch price was $74.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-4810MQ packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-2630 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Xeon E5-2630 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the Core i7-4810MQ versus 2.8 GHz on the Xeon E5-2630 — a 30.3% clock advantage for the Core i7-4810MQ (base: 2.8 GHz vs 2.3 GHz). The Core i7-4810MQ uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Xeon E5-2630 uses Sandy Bridge-EP (2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-4810MQ scores 6,074 against the Xeon E5-2630's 6,077 — a 0% lead for the Xeon E5-2630. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core i7-4810MQ vs 15360 kB (total) on the Xeon E5-2630.

Feature	Core i7-4810MQ	Xeon E5-2630
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	6 / 12+50%
Boost Clock	3.8 GHz+36%	2.8 GHz
Base Clock	2.8 GHz+22%	2.3 GHz
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	15360 kB (total)+88%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Sandy Bridge-EP (2012)
PassMark	6,074	6,077

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-4810MQ uses the PGA946 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-2630 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-4810MQ	Xeon E5-2630
Socket	PGA946	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i7-4810MQ was priced at $378, while the Xeon E5-2630 came in at $395. On launch pricing ($378 vs $395), Core i7-4810MQ was $17 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-4810MQ delivers 16.1 pts/$ vs 15.4 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2630 — making the Core i7-4810MQ the 4.3% better value option.

Feature	Core i7-4810MQ	Xeon E5-2630
MSRP	$378-4%	$395
Performance per Dollar	16.1+5%	15.4
Release Date	2014	2012

Search Core i7-4810MQ on Amazon

Search Xeon E5-2630 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.