
Core Ultra 5 226V

Xeon E5-2697 v3
Core Ultra 5 226V vs Xeon E5-2697 v3 Performance Spectrum
About PassMark
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 Ultra 5 226V vs Xeon E5-2697 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.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant

Among Us

Apex Legends

ARC Raiders

Baldur's Gate 3

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Core Ultra 5 226V vs Xeon E5-2697 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 Ultra 5 226V
2024Why buy it
- ✅+1.2% higher PassMark.
- ✅Draws 17W instead of 145W, a 128W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FCBGA2833 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011 and DDR4.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Arc 130V, while Xeon E5-2697 v3 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-2697 v3 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 35 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2697 v3, which brings 14 cores / 28 threads.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $300 MSRP, while Xeon E5-2697 v3 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Xeon E5-2697 v3
2014Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +8.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+337.5% larger total L3 cache (35 MB vs 8 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 14 cores / 28 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (18,182 vs 18,400).
- ❌752.9% higher power demand at 145W vs 17W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA2011 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 5 226V moves to FCBGA2833 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 5 226V can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is Core Ultra 5 226V better than Xeon E5-2697 v3?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Core Ultra 5 226V vs Xeon E5-2697 v3 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core Ultra 5 226V
The Core Ultra 5 226V is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 September 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Lunar Lake (2024) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 4.5 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 2.5 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2833. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 18,400 points. Launch price was $299.

Xeon E5-2697 v3
The Xeon E5-2697 v3 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Haswell-EP (2014−2015) architecture. It features 14 cores and 28 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 35 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 145 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133. Passmark benchmark score: 18,182 points. Launch price was $800.
Processing Power
The Core Ultra 5 226V packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-2697 v3 offers 14 cores / 28 threads — the Xeon E5-2697 v3 has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.5 GHz on the Core Ultra 5 226V versus 3.6 GHz on the Xeon E5-2697 v3 — a 22.2% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 5 226V (base: 2.1 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The Core Ultra 5 226V uses the Lunar Lake (2024) architecture (3 nm), while the Xeon E5-2697 v3 uses Haswell-EP (2014−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 5 226V scores 18,400 against the Xeon E5-2697 v3's 18,182 — a 1.2% lead for the Core Ultra 5 226V. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 5 226V vs 35 MB (total) on the Xeon E5-2697 v3.
| Feature | Core Ultra 5 226V | Xeon E5-2697 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 8 / 8 | 14 / 28+75% |
| Boost Clock | 4.5 GHz+25% | 3.6 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.1 GHz | 2.6 GHz+24% |
| L3 Cache | 8 MB (total) | 35 MB (total)+338% |
| L2 Cache | 2.5 MB (per core) | 256K (per core)+10140% |
| Process | 3 nm-86% | 22 nm |
| Architecture | Lunar Lake (2024) | Haswell-EP (2014−2015) |
| PassMark | 18,400+1% | 18,182 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 9,041 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,962 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 1,898 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Core Ultra 5 226V uses the FCBGA2833 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-2697 v3 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core Ultra 5 226V | Xeon E5-2697 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA2833 | LGA2011 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | LPDDR5X-8533 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 8 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 5 226V) / not specified (Xeon E5-2697 v3). The Core Ultra 5 226V includes integrated graphics (Arc 130V), while the Xeon E5-2697 v3 requires a dedicated GPU.
| Feature | Core Ultra 5 226V | Xeon E5-2697 v3 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | — |
| IGPU Model | Arc 130V | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | Yes | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













