Xeon E-2276G vs Xeon E-2286G

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.

Xeon E-2276G vs Xeon E-2286G 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.

Xeon E-2276G vs Xeon E-2286G: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Xeon E-2276G

2019

Why buy it

✅Draws 80W instead of 95W, a 15W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (14,034 vs 14,062).

Xeon E-2286G

2019

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌18.8% higher power demand at 95W vs 80W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E-2286G better than Xeon E-2276G?

Yes. Xeon E-2286G is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.2% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

For gaming, this matchup is basically a tie in the data we have.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E-2286G is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads.

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

Xeon E-2286G still makes the most sense overall. Xeon E-2286G comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Xeon E-2286G makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more multi-core headroom with 6 cores / 12 threads instead of 6/12. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Xeon E-2276G vs Xeon E-2286G Technical Specifications

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

Xeon E-2276G

The Xeon E-2276G is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 29 May 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Coffee Lake-S WS (2018−2019) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 80 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 14,034 points. Launch price was $362.

Xeon E-2286G

The Xeon E-2286G is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 29 May 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Coffee Lake-S WS (2018−2019) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 4 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 14,062 points. Launch price was $450.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Xeon E-2276G and Xeon E-2286G share an identical 6-core/12-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Xeon E-2276G versus 4.9 GHz on the Xeon E-2286G — identical boost frequencies (base: 3.8 GHz vs 4 GHz). Both are built on the Coffee Lake-S WS (2018−2019) architecture using a 14 nm process. In PassMark, the Xeon E-2276G scores 14,034 against the Xeon E-2286G's 14,062 — a 0.2% lead for the Xeon E-2286G. Both processors carry 12 MB (total) of L3 cache.

Feature	Xeon E-2276G	Xeon E-2286G
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	6 / 12
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz	4.9 GHz
Base Clock	3.8 GHz	4 GHz+5%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	12 MB (total)
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Coffee Lake-S WS (2018−2019)	Coffee Lake-S WS (2018−2019)
PassMark	14,034	14,062