Core Ultra 7 255H vs Xeon E7-4890 v2

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 7 255H vs Xeon E7-4890 v2 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 Ultra 7 255H vs Xeon E7-4890 v2: 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 7 255H

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +32.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 26W instead of 155W, a 129W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA2049 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011 and older memory support.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc Graphics 140T, while Xeon E7-4890 v2 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 38 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E7-4890 v2, which brings 15 cores / 30 threads and 32 PCIe lanes.

Xeon E7-4890 v2

2014

Why buy it

✅+56.3% larger total L3 cache (38 MB vs 24 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 15 cores / 30 threads, plus 32 PCIe lanes vs 28.
✅14.3% more PCIe lanes (32 vs 28) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 255H across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (5,500 vs 15,700).
❌496.2% higher power demand at 155W vs 26W.
❌Older platform position on LGA2011, while Core Ultra 7 255H moves to FCBGA2049 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 255H can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 7 255H better than Xeon E7-4890 v2?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E7-4890 v2 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core Ultra 7 255H is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core Ultra 7 255H is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 32.1% 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, Core Ultra 7 255H is the stronger fit. You are getting 185.5% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 16 cores and 16 threads.

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

Core Ultra 7 255H still makes the most sense overall. Core Ultra 7 255H comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 32.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Core Ultra 7 255H makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2014), a healthier platform with FCBGA2049 and DDR5 instead of LGA2011, and more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 16 threads instead of 15/30. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Core Ultra 7 255H vs Xeon E7-4890 v2 Technical Specifications

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

Core Ultra 7 255H

The Core Ultra 7 255H is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-H (2025) architecture. It features 16 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 4.4 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 24 MB. Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2049. Thermal design power (TDP): 26 MB + 24 MB. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 30,932 points. Launch price was $514.

Xeon E7-4890 v2

The Xeon E7-4890 v2 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It features 15 cores and 30 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 37.5 MB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 155 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333, DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 30,946 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 7 255H packs 16 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon E7-4890 v2 offers 15 cores / 30 threads — the Core Ultra 7 255H has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 5.1 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 255H versus 3.4 GHz on the Xeon E7-4890 v2 — a 40% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 7 255H (base: 4.4 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The Core Ultra 7 255H is built on the Arrow Lake-H (2025) architecture. In PassMark, the Core Ultra 7 255H scores 30,932 against the Xeon E7-4890 v2's 30,946 — a 0% lead for the Xeon E7-4890 v2. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,800 vs 730, a 117.3% lead for the Core Ultra 7 255H that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 15,700 vs 5,500 (96.2% advantage for the Core Ultra 7 255H). L3 cache: 24 MB on the Core Ultra 7 255H vs 37.5 MB on the Xeon E7-4890 v2.

Feature	Core Ultra 7 255H	Xeon E7-4890 v2
Cores / Threads	16 / 16+7%	15 / 30
Boost Clock	5.1 GHz+50%	3.4 GHz
Base Clock	4.4 GHz+57%	2.8 GHz
L3 Cache	24 MB	37.5 MB+56%
Process	5 nm-77%	22 nm
Architecture	Arrow Lake-H (2025)	—
PassMark	30,932	30,946
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	6,500
Geekbench 6 Single	2,800+284%	730
Geekbench 6 Multi	15,700+185%	5,500

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 7 255H uses the FCBGA2049 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon E7-4890 v2 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6400 on the Core Ultra 7 255H versus DDR3-1600 on the Xeon E7-4890 v2 — the Core Ultra 7 255H supports 300% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon E7-4890 v2 supports up to 1536 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 1100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core Ultra 7 255H) vs 4 (Xeon E7-4890 v2). PCIe lanes: 28 (Core Ultra 7 255H) vs 32 (Xeon E7-4890 v2) — the Xeon E7-4890 v2 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: HM870,WM880 (Core Ultra 7 255H) and C602 (Xeon E7-4890 v2).

Feature	Core Ultra 7 255H	Xeon E7-4890 v2
Socket	FCBGA2049	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+67%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6400+300%	DDR3-1600
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	1536 GB+1100%
RAM Channels	2	4+100%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	28	32+14%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 7 255H) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon E7-4890 v2). The Core Ultra 7 255H includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc Graphics 140T), while the Xeon E7-4890 v2 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core Ultra 7 255H targets High-End Laptop, Xeon E7-4890 v2 targets Enterprise Server (Legacy). Direct competitor: Xeon E7-4890 v2 rivals Xeon E5-2697 v2.

Feature	Core Ultra 7 255H	Xeon E7-4890 v2
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Intel Arc Graphics 140T	—
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	High-End Laptop	Enterprise Server (Legacy)