
Core i7-4950HQ

Xeon E5-2667
Core i7-4950HQ vs Xeon E5-2667 Performance Spectrum
About PassMark
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 i7-4950HQ vs Xeon E5-2667 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.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant

Among Us

Apex Legends

ARC Raiders

Baldur's Gate 3

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Core i7-4950HQ vs Xeon E5-2667: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
Core i7-4950HQ
2013Why buy it
- ✅Draws 47W instead of 130W, a 83W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Iris Pro Graphics 5200, while Xeon E5-2667 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-2667 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (7,405 vs 7,442).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 15 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2667, which brings 6 cores / 12 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.
Xeon E5-2667
2012Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +5.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+87.5% larger total L3 cache (15 MB vs 8 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 6 cores / 12 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 16.
- ✅150% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $1,552 MSRP, while Core i7-4950HQ mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌176.6% higher power demand at 130W vs 47W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-4950HQ can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is Xeon E5-2667 better than Core i7-4950HQ?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Core i7-4950HQ vs Xeon E5-2667 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i7-4950HQ
The Core i7-4950HQ is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 June 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Crystalwell (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1364. Thermal design power (TDP): 47 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 7,405 points. Launch price was $657.

Xeon E5-2667
The Xeon E5-2667 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 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 15360 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 7,442 points. Launch price was $714.
Processing Power
The Core i7-4950HQ packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-2667 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Xeon E5-2667 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.6 GHz on the Core i7-4950HQ versus 3.5 GHz on the Xeon E5-2667 — a 2.8% clock advantage for the Core i7-4950HQ (base: 2.4 GHz vs 2.9 GHz). The Core i7-4950HQ uses the Crystalwell (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the Xeon E5-2667 uses Sandy Bridge-EP (2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-4950HQ scores 7,405 against the Xeon E5-2667's 7,442 — a 0.5% lead for the Xeon E5-2667. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core i7-4950HQ vs 15360 kB (total) on the Xeon E5-2667.
| Feature | Core i7-4950HQ | Xeon E5-2667 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 8 | 6 / 12+50% |
| Boost Clock | 3.6 GHz+3% | 3.5 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.4 GHz | 2.9 GHz+21% |
| 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 | Crystalwell (2013−2014) | Sandy Bridge-EP (2012) |
| PassMark | 7,405 | 7,442 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 3,317 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 842 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 3,317 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Core i7-4950HQ uses the BGA1364 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-2667 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3L-1600 memory speed. The Xeon E5-2667 supports up to 384 GB of RAM compared to 32 GB — 1100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i7-4950HQ) vs 4 (Xeon E5-2667). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-4950HQ) vs 40 (Xeon E5-2667) — the Xeon E5-2667 offers 24 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: HM87,QM87 (Core i7-4950HQ) and Intel C602,Intel X79 (Xeon E5-2667).
| Feature | Core i7-4950HQ | Xeon E5-2667 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | BGA1364 | LGA2011 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+50% | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3L-1600 | DDR3 1600 MHz |
| Max RAM Capacity | 32 GB | 384 GB+1100% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 4+100% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 40+150% |
Advanced Features
Virtualization support: Yes (Core i7-4950HQ) vs true (Xeon E5-2667). The Core i7-4950HQ includes integrated graphics (Iris Pro Graphics 5200), while the Xeon E5-2667 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Xeon E5-2667 targets Server.
| Feature | Core i7-4950HQ | Xeon E5-2667 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Iris Pro Graphics 5200 | — |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | Yes | true |
| Target Use | — | Server |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













