Core i7-6820EQ vs Xeon E3-1240 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 i7-6820EQ vs Xeon E3-1240 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 i7-6820EQ vs Xeon E3-1240 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 i7-6820EQ

2015

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 45W instead of 80W, a 35W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 530, while Xeon E3-1240 v3 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E3-1240 v3 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Launch MSRP is still $378 MSRP, while Xeon E3-1240 v3 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Xeon E3-1240 v3

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (7,001 vs 7,025).
❌77.8% higher power demand at 80W vs 45W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-6820EQ can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-6820EQ better than Xeon E3-1240 v3?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E3-1240 v3 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-6820EQ 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, Core i7-6820EQ is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads.

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

Core i7-6820EQ is the better buy right now. Core i7-6820EQ comes in at an unclear MSRP at $378 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.3% better PassMark. The compromise is that Xeon E3-1240 v3 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 3.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (18.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 i7-6820EQ makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2013) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 8 threads instead of 4/8. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i7-6820EQ vs Xeon E3-1240 v3 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-6820EQ

The Core i7-6820EQ is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 12 October 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Max frequency: 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: LPDDR3-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 7,025 points. Launch price was $378.

Xeon E3-1240 v3

The Xeon E3-1240 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): 80 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 7,001 points. Launch price was $300.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i7-6820EQ and Xeon E3-1240 v3 share an identical 4-core/8-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Core i7-6820EQ versus 3.8 GHz on the Xeon E3-1240 v3 — a 30.3% clock advantage for the Xeon E3-1240 v3. The Core i7-6820EQ uses the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E3-1240 v3 uses Haswell-WS (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-6820EQ scores 7,025 against the Xeon E3-1240 v3's 7,001 — a 0.3% lead for the Core i7-6820EQ. L3 cache: 8 MB on the Core i7-6820EQ vs 8192 kB (total) on the Xeon E3-1240 v3.

Feature	Core i7-6820EQ	Xeon E3-1240 v3
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 8
Boost Clock	2.8 GHz	3.8 GHz+36%
Base Clock	—	3.4 GHz
L3 Cache	8 MB	8192 kB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Skylake (2015−2016)	Haswell-WS (2013−2014)
PassMark	7,025	7,001

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-6820EQ) / not specified (Xeon E3-1240 v3). The Core i7-6820EQ includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 530), while the Xeon E3-1240 v3 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-6820EQ targets Embedded.