Core i7-4960HQ vs Xeon X5675

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 i7-4960HQ vs Xeon X5675 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 i7-4960HQ vs Xeon X5675: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i7-4960HQ

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 47W instead of 95W, a 48W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon X5675 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (6,370 vs 6,418).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 12 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon X5675, which brings 6 cores / 12 threads.

Xeon X5675

2011

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 6 cores / 12 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $1,440 MSRP, while Core i7-4960HQ mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌102.1% higher power demand at 95W vs 47W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon X5675 better than Core i7-4960HQ?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon X5675 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-4960HQ 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 X5675 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 4.2% 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 X5675 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 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 X5675 is the better buy right now. Xeon X5675 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $1,440 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 4.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (4.5 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 i7-4960HQ makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i7-4960HQ vs Xeon X5675 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-4960HQ

The Core i7-4960HQ is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Crystalwell (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 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: BGA1364. Thermal design power (TDP): 47 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,370 points. Launch price was $657.

Xeon X5675

The Xeon X5675 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 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.06 GHz, with boost up to 3.46 GHz. L3 cache: 12288 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1366. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,418 points. Launch price was $162.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-4960HQ packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon X5675 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Xeon X5675 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the Core i7-4960HQ versus 3.46 GHz on the Xeon X5675 — a 9.4% clock advantage for the Core i7-4960HQ (base: 2.6 GHz vs 3.06 GHz). The Core i7-4960HQ uses the Crystalwell (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the Xeon X5675 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-4960HQ scores 6,370 against the Xeon X5675's 6,418 — a 0.8% lead for the Xeon X5675. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core i7-4960HQ vs 12288 kB (total) on the Xeon X5675.

Feature	Core i7-4960HQ	Xeon X5675
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	6 / 12+50%
Boost Clock	3.8 GHz+10%	3.46 GHz
Base Clock	2.6 GHz	3.06 GHz+18%
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	12288 kB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Crystalwell (2013−2014)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	6,370	6,418

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-4960HQ uses the BGA1364 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon X5675 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-4960HQ	Xeon X5675
Socket	BGA1364	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR3-1333
RAM Channels	—	3
ECC Support	—	Yes

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Core i7-4960HQ) / VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon X5675). Primary use case: Xeon X5675 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Xeon X5675 rivals Core i7-980X.