
Core Ultra 7 258V

Xeon E5-2695 v4
Core Ultra 7 258V vs Xeon E5-2695 v4 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 7 258V vs Xeon E5-2695 v4 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 7 258V vs Xeon E5-2695 v4: 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 258V
2024Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +4.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 17W instead of 120W, a 103W 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 140V, while Xeon E5-2695 v4 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 45 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2695 v4, which brings 18 cores / 36 threads.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $450 MSRP, while Xeon E5-2695 v4 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Xeon E5-2695 v4
2016Why buy it
- ✅+275% larger total L3 cache (45 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 18 cores / 36 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 258V across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (18,835 vs 18,947).
- ❌605.9% higher power demand at 120W vs 17W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA2011 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 7 258V moves to FCBGA2833 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 258V can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is Core Ultra 7 258V better than Xeon E5-2695 v4?
Which one is better for gaming?
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 7 258V vs Xeon E5-2695 v4 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core Ultra 7 258V
The Core Ultra 7 258V 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 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 12 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: 18,947 points. Launch price was $299.

Xeon E5-2695 v4
The Xeon E5-2695 v4 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 June 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture. It features 18 cores and 36 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 45 MB. L2 cache: 4.5 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 120 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 18,835 points. Launch price was $2,424.
Processing Power
The Core Ultra 7 258V packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-2695 v4 offers 18 cores / 36 threads — the Xeon E5-2695 v4 has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 258V versus 3.3 GHz on the Xeon E5-2695 v4 — a 37% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 7 258V (base: 2.2 GHz vs 2.1 GHz). The Core Ultra 7 258V uses the Lunar Lake (2024) architecture (3 nm), while the Xeon E5-2695 v4 uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 7 258V scores 18,947 against the Xeon E5-2695 v4's 18,835 — a 0.6% lead for the Core Ultra 7 258V. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 7 258V vs 45 MB on the Xeon E5-2695 v4.
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 258V | Xeon E5-2695 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 8 / 8 | 18 / 36+125% |
| Boost Clock | 4.8 GHz+45% | 3.3 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.2 GHz+5% | 2.1 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 12 MB (total) | 45 MB+275% |
| L2 Cache | 2.5 MB (per core) | 4.5 MB+80% |
| Process | 3 nm-79% | 14 nm |
| Architecture | Lunar Lake (2024) | Broadwell (2015−2019) |
| PassMark | 18,947 | 18,835 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 10,000 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,750 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 11,000 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Core Ultra 7 258V uses the FCBGA2833 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon E5-2695 v4 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 258V | Xeon E5-2695 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA2833 | LGA2011 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | LPDDR5X-8533 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 32 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 8 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 7 258V) / not specified (Xeon E5-2695 v4). The Core Ultra 7 258V includes integrated graphics (Arc 140V), while the Xeon E5-2695 v4 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core Ultra 7 258V targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 7 258V rivals Ryzen 7 8840U.
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 258V | Xeon E5-2695 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | — |
| IGPU Model | Arc 140V | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | — |
| Target Use | Gaming | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













