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.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Ryzen 5 3600

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +8.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 65W instead of 135W, a 70W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon E5-4667 v3.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (32 MB vs 40 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-4667 v3, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 88.9 vs 120.3 PassMark/$ ($199 MSRP vs $128 MSRP).

Xeon E5-4667 v3

2015

Why buy it

✅+25% larger total L3 cache (40 MB vs 32 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads.
✅Costs $71 less on MSRP ($128 MSRP vs $199 MSRP).
✅Delivers 35.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 120.3 vs 88.9 PassMark/$ ($128 MSRP vs $199 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 5 3600 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (15,397 vs 17,685).
❌107.7% higher power demand at 135W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Ryzen 5 3600.

Ryzen 5 3600

2019

Xeon E5-4667 v3

2015

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +8.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 65W instead of 135W, a 70W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Xeon E5-4667 v3.

Why buy it

✅+25% larger total L3 cache (40 MB vs 32 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads.
✅Costs $71 less on MSRP ($128 MSRP vs $199 MSRP).
✅Delivers 35.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 120.3 vs 88.9 PassMark/$ ($128 MSRP vs $199 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (32 MB vs 40 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-4667 v3, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 88.9 vs 120.3 PassMark/$ ($199 MSRP vs $128 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 5 3600 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (15,397 vs 17,685).
❌107.7% higher power demand at 135W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Ryzen 5 3600.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 5 3600 better than Xeon E5-4667 v3?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon E5-4667 v3 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Ryzen 5 3600 is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Ryzen 5 3600 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 8.7% 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, Ryzen 5 3600 is the better fit. You are getting 14.9% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads.

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

Ryzen 5 3600 is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon E5-4667 v3 makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Ryzen 5 3600 is 55.5% more expensive on MSRP at $199 MSRP versus $128 MSRP, and it gives you a 8.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Xeon E5-4667 v3 is also 35.4% better value on MSRP (120.3 vs 88.9 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

Ryzen 5 3600 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2015) and more multi-core headroom with 6 cores / 12 threads instead of 16/32. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Ryzen 5 3600 Benchmark Check

Xeon E5-4667 v3 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Ryzen 5 3600	Xeon E5-4667 v3
1080p
low	200 FPS	175 FPS
medium	161 FPS	151 FPS
high	135 FPS	119 FPS
ultra	106 FPS	96 FPS
1440p
low	154 FPS	147 FPS
medium	119 FPS	123 FPS
high	96 FPS	94 FPS
ultra	75 FPS	76 FPS
4K
low	70 FPS	68 FPS
medium	58 FPS	61 FPS
high	46 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	36 FPS	38 FPS

Open Ryzen 5 3600 Open Xeon E5-4667 v3

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Ryzen 5 3600	Xeon E5-4667 v3
1080p
low	442 FPS	212 FPS
medium	404 FPS	193 FPS
high	332 FPS	164 FPS
ultra	295 FPS	132 FPS
1440p
low	420 FPS	183 FPS
medium	359 FPS	166 FPS
high	303 FPS	143 FPS
ultra	263 FPS	112 FPS
4K
low	297 FPS	115 FPS
medium	259 FPS	106 FPS
high	230 FPS	94 FPS
ultra	201 FPS	74 FPS

Open Ryzen 5 3600 Open Xeon E5-4667 v3

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Ryzen 5 3600	Xeon E5-4667 v3
1080p
low	442 FPS	385 FPS
medium	442 FPS	385 FPS
high	442 FPS	385 FPS
ultra	442 FPS	385 FPS
1440p
low	442 FPS	385 FPS
medium	442 FPS	385 FPS
high	442 FPS	385 FPS
ultra	432 FPS	385 FPS
4K
low	442 FPS	385 FPS
medium	361 FPS	359 FPS
high	305 FPS	324 FPS
ultra	242 FPS	270 FPS

Open Ryzen 5 3600 Open Xeon E5-4667 v3

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Ryzen 5 3600	Xeon E5-4667 v3
1080p
low	442 FPS	385 FPS
medium	442 FPS	385 FPS
high	442 FPS	385 FPS
ultra	442 FPS	385 FPS
1440p
low	442 FPS	385 FPS
medium	442 FPS	385 FPS
high	442 FPS	385 FPS
ultra	442 FPS	385 FPS
4K
low	442 FPS	385 FPS
medium	442 FPS	385 FPS
high	413 FPS	385 FPS
ultra	357 FPS	358 FPS

Open Ryzen 5 3600 Open Xeon E5-4667 v3

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Ryzen 5 3600 and Xeon E5-4667 v3

Ryzen 5 3600

The Ryzen 5 3600 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 July 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Matisse (2019−2020) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 17,685 points. Launch price was $199.

Xeon E5-4667 v3

The Xeon E5-4667 v3 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Haswell-EP (2014−2015) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L3 cache: 40 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 135 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 15,397 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Ryzen 5 3600 packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Xeon E5-4667 v3 offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Xeon E5-4667 v3 has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.2 GHz on the Ryzen 5 3600 versus 2.9 GHz on the Xeon E5-4667 v3 — a 36.6% clock advantage for the Ryzen 5 3600 (base: 3.6 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Ryzen 5 3600 uses the Matisse (2019−2020) architecture (7 nm, 12 nm), while the Xeon E5-4667 v3 uses Haswell-EP (2014−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Ryzen 5 3600 scores 17,685 against the Xeon E5-4667 v3's 15,397 — a 13.8% lead for the Ryzen 5 3600. L3 cache: 32 MB (total) on the Ryzen 5 3600 vs 40 MB (total) on the Xeon E5-4667 v3.

Feature	Ryzen 5 3600	Xeon E5-4667 v3
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	16 / 32+167%
Boost Clock	4.2 GHz+45%	2.9 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+80%	2 GHz
L3 Cache	32 MB (total)	40 MB (total)+25%
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+100%	256K (per core)
Process	7 nm, 12 nm-68%	22 nm
Architecture	Matisse (2019−2020)	Haswell-EP (2014−2015)
PassMark	17,685+15%	15,397
Cinebench R23 Multi	9,500	—
Geekbench 6 Single	1,295	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,898	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Ryzen 5 3600 uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon E5-4667 v3 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Ryzen 5 3600	Xeon E5-4667 v3
Socket	AM4	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0+33%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-3200	—
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	24	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: Yes (Ryzen 5 3600) / not specified (Xeon E5-4667 v3). Primary use case: Ryzen 5 3600 targets Gaming/Budget Workstation. Direct competitor: Ryzen 5 3600 rivals Core i5-10400.

Feature	Ryzen 5 3600	Xeon E5-4667 v3
Integrated GPU	No	—
Unlocked	Yes	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	Yes	—
Target Use	Gaming/Budget Workstation	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Ryzen 5 3600 launched at $199 MSRP, while the Xeon E5-4667 v3 debuted at $128. On MSRP ($199 vs $128), the Xeon E5-4667 v3 is $71 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Ryzen 5 3600 delivers 88.9 pts/$ vs 120.3 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-4667 v3 — making the Xeon E5-4667 v3 the 30% better value option.