Core Ultra 7 266V vs Xeon E5-2682 v4

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 266V vs Xeon E5-2682 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.

Core Ultra 7 266V vs Xeon E5-2682 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 266V

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +11.5% 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 FCLGA2011 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 40 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2682 v4, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads.
❌Launch MSRP is still $520 MSRP, while Xeon E5-2682 v4 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Xeon E5-2682 v4

2016

Why buy it

✅+233.3% larger total L3 cache (40 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 266V across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (18,971 vs 19,274).
❌605.9% higher power demand at 120W vs 17W.
❌Older platform position on FCLGA2011 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 7 266V moves to FCBGA2833 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 7 266V better than Xeon E5-2682 v4?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5-2682 v4 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core Ultra 7 266V 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 266V is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 11.5% 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 266V is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.6% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 8 threads.

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

Core Ultra 7 266V is the better buy right now. Core Ultra 7 266V comes in at an unclear MSRP at $520 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 11.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (37.1 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core Ultra 7 266V makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2016), a healthier platform with FCBGA2833 and DDR5 instead of FCLGA2011, and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 8 threads instead of 16/32. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Core Ultra 7 266V vs Xeon E5-2682 v4 Technical Specifications

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

Core Ultra 7 266V

The Core Ultra 7 266V 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 5 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: 19,274 points. Launch price was $299.

Xeon E5-2682 v4

The Xeon E5-2682 v4 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Max frequency: 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 40 MB. L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCLGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 120 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 18,971 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 7 266V packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-2682 v4 offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Xeon E5-2682 v4 has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 266V versus 2.5 GHz on the Xeon E5-2682 v4 — a 66.7% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 7 266V. The Core Ultra 7 266V uses the Lunar Lake (2024) architecture (3 nm), while the Xeon E5-2682 v4 uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 7 266V scores 19,274 against the Xeon E5-2682 v4's 18,971 — a 1.6% lead for the Core Ultra 7 266V. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 7 266V vs 40 MB on the Xeon E5-2682 v4.

Feature	Core Ultra 7 266V	Xeon E5-2682 v4
Cores / Threads	8 / 8	16 / 32+100%
Boost Clock	5 GHz+100%	2.5 GHz
Base Clock	2.2 GHz	—
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	40 MB+233%
L2 Cache	2.5 MB (per core)	4 MB+60%
Process	3 nm-79%	14 nm
Architecture	Lunar Lake (2024)	Broadwell (2015−2019)
PassMark	19,274+2%	18,971

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 7 266V uses the FCBGA2833 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon E5-2682 v4 uses FCLGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.