Core i7-6700T vs Xeon E5-4640

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 i7-6700T vs Xeon E5-4640 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 i7-6700T vs Xeon E5-4640: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i7-6700T

2015

Why buy it

✅Costs $2,422 less on MSRP ($303 MSRP vs $2,725 MSRP).
✅Delivers 797.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 23.1 vs 2.6 PassMark/$ ($303 MSRP vs $2,725 MSRP).
✅Draws 35W instead of 95W, a 60W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-4640 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (6,994 vs 7,012).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 20 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-4640, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads.

Xeon E5-4640

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+150% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 2.6 vs 23.1 PassMark/$ ($2,725 MSRP vs $303 MSRP).
❌171.4% higher power demand at 95W vs 35W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E5-4640 better than Core i7-6700T?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-4640 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-6700T 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 E5-4640 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 7.5% 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 E5-4640 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 150% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 8 MB).

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

Xeon E5-4640 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Xeon E5-4640 comes in 799.3% more expensive on MSRP at $2,725 MSRP versus $303 MSRP, and it still gives you a 7.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i7-6700T only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2015 platform. Even with 797.0% better value on paper (23.1 vs 2.6 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA1151.

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

Core i7-6700T makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2012). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i7-6700T vs Xeon E5-4640 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-6700T

The Core i7-6700T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 6,994 points. Launch price was $303.

Xeon E5-4640

The Xeon E5-4640 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 May 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge-EP (2012) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 20480 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: 7,012 points. Launch price was $2,730.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-6700T packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-4640 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Xeon E5-4640 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.6 GHz on the Core i7-6700T versus 2.8 GHz on the Xeon E5-4640 — a 25% clock advantage for the Core i7-6700T (base: 2.8 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Core i7-6700T uses the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E5-4640 uses Sandy Bridge-EP (2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-6700T scores 6,994 against the Xeon E5-4640's 7,012 — a 0.3% lead for the Xeon E5-4640. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core i7-6700T vs 20480 kB (total) on the Xeon E5-4640.

Feature	Core i7-6700T	Xeon E5-4640
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	8 / 16+100%
Boost Clock	3.6 GHz+29%	2.8 GHz
Base Clock	2.8 GHz+17%	2.4 GHz
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	20480 kB (total)+150%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Skylake (2015−2016)	Sandy Bridge-EP (2012)
PassMark	6,994	7,012

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-6700T uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-4640 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-6700T	Xeon E5-4640
Socket	LGA1151	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 5.0+67%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i7-6700T was priced at $303, while the Xeon E5-4640 came in at $2725. On launch pricing ($303 vs $2725), Core i7-6700T was $2422 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-6700T delivers 23.1 pts/$ vs 2.6 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-4640 — making the Core i7-6700T the 159.9% better value option.

Feature	Core i7-6700T	Xeon E5-4640
MSRP	$303-89%	$2725
Performance per Dollar	23.1+788%	2.6
Release Date	2015	2012

Search Core i7-6700T on Amazon

Search Xeon E5-4640 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.