Xeon E3-1240 v2 vs Xeon X5675

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 E3-1240 v2 vs Xeon X5675 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 E3-1240 v2 vs Xeon X5675: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Xeon E3-1240 v2

2012

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,190 less on MSRP ($250 MSRP vs $1,440 MSRP).
✅Delivers 473.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 25.5 vs 4.5 PassMark/$ ($250 MSRP vs $1,440 MSRP).
✅Draws 69W instead of 95W, a 26W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (6,385 vs 6,418).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 12 MB).

Xeon X5675

2011

Why buy it

✅+0.5% higher PassMark.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 4.5 vs 25.5 PassMark/$ ($1,440 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).
❌37.7% higher power demand at 95W vs 69W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E3-1240 v2 better than Xeon X5675?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Xeon E3-1240 v2 is ahead with a 0.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Xeon X5675 pulls ahead with 0.5% better PassMark. Xeon X5675 also has the bigger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon X5675 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.5% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).

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

Xeon E3-1240 v2 is the better buy right now. Xeon E3-1240 v2 comes in $1,190 cheaper on MSRP at $250 MSRP versus $1,440 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Xeon X5675 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.5% better PassMark. It is also 473.0% better value on MSRP (25.5 vs 4.5 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Xeon E3-1240 v2 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Xeon E3-1240 v2 vs Xeon X5675 Technical Specifications

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

Xeon E3-1240 v2

The Xeon E3-1240 v2 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 May 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 69 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,385 points. Launch price was $304.

Xeon X5675

The Xeon X5675 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 February 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Westmere-EP (2010−2011) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.06 GHz, with boost up to 3.46 GHz. L3 cache: 12288 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1366. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 6,418 points. Launch price was $162.

⚡

Processing Power

The Xeon E3-1240 v2 packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon X5675 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Xeon X5675 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the Xeon E3-1240 v2 versus 3.46 GHz on the Xeon X5675 — a 9.4% clock advantage for the Xeon E3-1240 v2 (base: 3.4 GHz vs 3.06 GHz). The Xeon E3-1240 v2 uses the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Xeon X5675 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Xeon E3-1240 v2 scores 6,385 against the Xeon X5675's 6,418 — a 0.5% lead for the Xeon X5675. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Xeon E3-1240 v2 vs 12288 kB (total) on the Xeon X5675.

Feature	Xeon E3-1240 v2	Xeon X5675
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	6 / 12+50%
Boost Clock	3.8 GHz+10%	3.46 GHz
Base Clock	3.4 GHz+11%	3.06 GHz
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	12288 kB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	6,385	6,418

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Xeon E3-1240 v2 uses the LGA1155 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon X5675 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Xeon E3-1240 v2	Xeon X5675
Socket	LGA1155	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR3-1333
RAM Channels	—	3
ECC Support	—	Yes

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Xeon E3-1240 v2) / VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon X5675). Primary use case: Xeon X5675 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Xeon X5675 rivals Core i7-980X.

Feature	Xeon E3-1240 v2	Xeon X5675
Integrated GPU	—	No
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	—	Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Xeon E3-1240 v2 was priced at $250, while the Xeon X5675 came in at $1440. On launch pricing ($250 vs $1440), Xeon E3-1240 v2 was $1190 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Xeon E3-1240 v2 delivers 25.5 pts/$ vs 4.5 pts/$ for the Xeon X5675 — making the Xeon E3-1240 v2 the 140.6% better value option.

Feature	Xeon E3-1240 v2	Xeon X5675
MSRP	$250-83%	$1440
Performance per Dollar	25.5+467%	4.5
Release Date	2012	2011

Search Xeon E3-1240 v2 on Amazon

Search Xeon X5675 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.