Core i7-7820EQ vs Xeon E5-2450

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 i7-7820EQ vs Xeon E5-2450 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 i7-7820EQ vs Xeon E5-2450: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i7-7820EQ

2017

Why buy it

✅Costs $316 less on MSRP ($378 MSRP vs $694 MSRP).
✅Delivers 82.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 19.8 vs 10.9 PassMark/$ ($378 MSRP vs $694 MSRP).
✅Draws 45W instead of 95W, a 50W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-2450 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (7,470 vs 7,534).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 20 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2450, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads.

Xeon E5-2450

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.8% 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 10.9 vs 19.8 PassMark/$ ($694 MSRP vs $378 MSRP).
❌111.1% higher power demand at 95W vs 45W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E5-2450 better than Core i7-7820EQ?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-2450 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-7820EQ 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 E5-2450 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 7.8% 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 E5-2450 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.9% 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 E5-2450 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Xeon E5-2450 comes in 83.6% more expensive on MSRP at $694 MSRP versus $378 MSRP, and it still gives you a 7.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i7-7820EQ only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2017 platform. Even with 82.0% better value on paper (19.8 vs 10.9 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on that older platform.

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

Core i7-7820EQ makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2012). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i7-7820EQ vs Xeon E5-2450 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-7820EQ

The Core i7-7820EQ is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Max frequency: 3.1 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 7,470 points. Launch price was $378.

Xeon E5-2450

The Xeon E5-2450 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 May 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge-EN (2012) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L3 cache: 20480 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 7,534 points. Launch price was $500.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-7820EQ packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-2450 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Xeon E5-2450 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.1 GHz on the Core i7-7820EQ versus 2.9 GHz on the Xeon E5-2450 — a 6.7% clock advantage for the Core i7-7820EQ. The Core i7-7820EQ uses the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E5-2450 uses Sandy Bridge-EN (2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-7820EQ scores 7,470 against the Xeon E5-2450's 7,534 — a 0.9% lead for the Xeon E5-2450. L3 cache: 8 MB on the Core i7-7820EQ vs 20480 kB (total) on the Xeon E5-2450.

Feature	Core i7-7820EQ	Xeon E5-2450
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	8 / 16+100%
Boost Clock	3.1 GHz+7%	2.9 GHz
Base Clock	—	2.1 GHz
L3 Cache	8 MB	20480 kB (total)+150%
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Kaby Lake (2016−2019)	Sandy Bridge-EN (2012)
PassMark	7,470	7,534

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i7-7820EQ was priced at $378, while the Xeon E5-2450 came in at $694. On launch pricing ($378 vs $694), Core i7-7820EQ was $316 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-7820EQ delivers 19.8 pts/$ vs 10.9 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2450 — making the Core i7-7820EQ the 58.2% better value option.

Feature	Core i7-7820EQ	Xeon E5-2450
MSRP	$378-46%	$694
Performance per Dollar	19.8+82%	10.9
Release Date	2017	2012

Search Core i7-7820EQ on Amazon

Search Xeon E5-2450 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.