Core i7-840QM vs Xeon E5410

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 i7-840QM vs Xeon E5410 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 i7-840QM vs Xeon E5410: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i7-840QM

2010

Why buy it

✅Draws 45W instead of 80W, a 35W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,025 vs 2,032).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 12 MB).

Xeon E5410

2007

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $256 MSRP, while Core i7-840QM mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌77.8% higher power demand at 80W vs 45W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-840QM better than Xeon E5410?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5410 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i7-840QM 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, Xeon E5410 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 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?

Core i7-840QM is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon E5410 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. Core i7-840QM comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $256 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Xeon E5410 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.3% better PassMark. Xeon E5410 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (7.9 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

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

Core i7-840QM makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2010 vs 2007). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i7-840QM vs Xeon E5410 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-840QM

The Core i7-840QM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 June 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Clarksfield (2009−2010) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 1.86 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,025 points. Launch price was $568.

Xeon E5410

The Xeon E5410 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 November 2007 (18 years ago). It is based on the Harpertown (2007−2008) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.33 GHz, with boost up to 0.33 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB L2 Cache. L2 cache: 6 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA771. Thermal design power (TDP): 80 Watt. Memory support: DDR2, DDR3 Depends on motherboard. Passmark benchmark score: 2,032 points. Launch price was $256.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-840QM packs 4 cores / 8 threads, matching the Xeon E5410's 4 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the Core i7-840QM versus 0.33 GHz on the Xeon E5410 — a 162.6% clock advantage for the Core i7-840QM (base: 1.86 GHz vs 2.33 GHz). The Core i7-840QM uses the Clarksfield (2009−2010) architecture (45 nm), while the Xeon E5410 uses Harpertown (2007−2008) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-840QM scores 2,025 against the Xeon E5410's 2,032 — a 0.3% lead for the Xeon E5410. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core i7-840QM vs 12 MB L2 Cache on the Xeon E5410.

Feature	Core i7-840QM	Xeon E5410
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 4
Boost Clock	3.2 GHz+870%	0.33 GHz
Base Clock	1.86 GHz	2.33 GHz+25%
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	12 MB L2 Cache+50%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	6 MB (total)+2300%
Process	45 nm	45 nm
Architecture	Clarksfield (2009−2010)	Harpertown (2007−2008)
PassMark	2,025	2,032
Geekbench 6 Single	390	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,050	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-840QM uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Xeon E5410 uses LGA771 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Core i7-840QM versus DDR2-667 on the Xeon E5410 — the Core i7-840QM supports 99.9% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon E5410 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-840QM) vs 0 (Xeon E5410) — the Core i7-840QM offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	Core i7-840QM	Xeon E5410
Socket	PGA988	LGA771
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333+100%	DDR2-667
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	32 GB+300%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-840QM) vs VT-x (Xeon E5410). Primary use case: Core i7-840QM targets Laptop, Xeon E5410 targets Server.