Core i7-6770HQ vs Xeon E3-1245 v3

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 i7-6770HQ vs Xeon E3-1245 v3 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 i7-6770HQ vs Xeon E3-1245 v3: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i7-6770HQ

2016

Why buy it

✅Draws 45W instead of 84W, a 39W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E3-1245 v3 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (1,769 vs 3,820).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 8 MB).

Xeon E3-1245 v3

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $490 MSRP, while Core i7-6770HQ mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌86.7% higher power demand at 84W vs 45W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E3-1245 v3 better than Core i7-6770HQ?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E3-1245 v3 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-6770HQ 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 E3-1245 v3 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.8% 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 E3-1245 v3 is the stronger fit. You are getting 115.9% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 6 MB).

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

Xeon E3-1245 v3 is the better buy right now. Xeon E3-1245 v3 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $490 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (14.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 i7-6770HQ makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2013). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i7-6770HQ vs Xeon E3-1245 v3 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-6770HQ

The Core i7-6770HQ is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1440. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 7,083 points. Launch price was $434.

Xeon E3-1245 v3

The Xeon E3-1245 v3 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 June 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell-WS (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 8192 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 84 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 7,036 points. Launch price was $320.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i7-6770HQ and Xeon E3-1245 v3 share an identical 4-core/8-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.5 GHz on the Core i7-6770HQ versus 3.8 GHz on the Xeon E3-1245 v3 — a 8.2% clock advantage for the Xeon E3-1245 v3 (base: 2.6 GHz vs 3.4 GHz). The Core i7-6770HQ uses the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E3-1245 v3 uses Haswell-WS (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-6770HQ scores 7,083 against the Xeon E3-1245 v3's 7,036 — a 0.7% lead for the Core i7-6770HQ. Multi-core Geekbench: 1,769 vs 3,820 (73.4% advantage for the Xeon E3-1245 v3). L3 cache: 6 MB on the Core i7-6770HQ vs 8192 kB (total) on the Xeon E3-1245 v3.

Feature	Core i7-6770HQ	Xeon E3-1245 v3
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 8
Boost Clock	3.5 GHz	3.8 GHz+9%
Base Clock	2.6 GHz	3.4 GHz+31%
L3 Cache	6 MB	8192 kB (total)+33%
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Skylake (2015−2016)	Haswell-WS (2013−2014)
PassMark	7,083	7,036
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,203
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,769	3,820+116%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-6770HQ uses the BGA1440 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E3-1245 v3 uses LGA1150 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 2133 on the Core i7-6770HQ versus DDR3-1600 on the Xeon E3-1245 v3 — the Core i7-6770HQ supports 33.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i7-6770HQ supports up to 64 GB of RAM compared to 32 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: HM170,QM170,CM236 (Core i7-6770HQ) and LGA1150 (Xeon E3-1245 v3).

Feature	Core i7-6770HQ	Xeon E3-1245 v3
Socket	BGA1440	LGA1150
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	2133+33%	DDR3-1600
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB+100%	32 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Core i7-6770HQ) vs VT-x, VT-d (Xeon E3-1245 v3). Both include integrated graphics — Intel Iris Pro Graphics 580 (Core i7-6770HQ) and HD Graphics P4600 (Xeon E3-1245 v3) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU.