Pentium M 760 vs Xeon 3.06

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.

Pentium M 760 vs Xeon 3.06 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.

Pentium M 760 vs Xeon 3.06: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Pentium M 760

2005

Why buy it

✅Draws 27W instead of 97W, a 70W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (515 vs 535).

Xeon 3.06

2003

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌259.3% higher power demand at 97W vs 27W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon 3.06 better than Pentium M 760?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon 3.06 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Pentium M 760 is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Xeon 3.06 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.1% 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, Xeon 3.06 is the stronger fit. You are getting 3.9% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Xeon 3.06 still makes the most sense overall. Xeon 3.06 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Pentium M 760 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2005 vs 2003). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Pentium M 760 vs Xeon 3.06 Technical Specifications

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

Pentium M 760

The Pentium M 760 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Dothan (2004−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 27 Watt. Memory support: DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 515 points. Launch price was $69.

Xeon 3.06

The Xeon 3.06 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Gallatin (2003−2004) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 3.07 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: PGA604. Thermal design power (TDP): 97 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 535 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Pentium M 760 and Xeon 3.06 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Pentium M 760 versus 3.07 GHz on the Xeon 3.06 — a 42.2% clock advantage for the Xeon 3.06. The Pentium M 760 uses the Dothan (2004−2005) architecture (90 nm), while the Xeon 3.06 uses Gallatin (2003−2004) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Pentium M 760 scores 515 against the Xeon 3.06's 535 — a 3.8% lead for the Xeon 3.06. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Pentium M 760 vs 2 MB on the Xeon 3.06.

Feature	Pentium M 760	Xeon 3.06
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2 GHz	3.07 GHz+53%
Base Clock	2 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	2 MB
L2 Cache	2 MB+300%	512 kB
Process	90 nm-31%	130 nm
Architecture	Dothan (2004−2005)	Gallatin (2003−2004)
PassMark	515	535+4%
Geekbench 6 Single	240	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Pentium M 760 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Xeon 3.06 uses PGA604 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.