Xeon E3-1241 v3 vs Xeon W3690

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 E3-1241 v3 vs Xeon W3690 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 E3-1241 v3 vs Xeon W3690: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Xeon E3-1241 v3

2014

Why buy it

✅Costs $310 less on MSRP ($273 MSRP vs $583 MSRP).
✅Delivers 112.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 26.3 vs 12.3 PassMark/$ ($273 MSRP vs $583 MSRP).
✅Draws 80W instead of 130W, a 50W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (7,169 vs 7,191).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 12 MB).

Xeon W3690

2011

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.
✅+50% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 8 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.3 vs 26.3 PassMark/$ ($583 MSRP vs $273 MSRP).
❌62.5% higher power demand at 130W vs 80W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E3-1241 v3 better than Xeon W3690?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Xeon E3-1241 v3 is ahead with a 1.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Xeon W3690 pulls ahead with 0.3% better PassMark. Xeon W3690 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 W3690 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% 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 E3-1241 v3 is the better buy right now. Xeon E3-1241 v3 comes in $310 cheaper on MSRP at $273 MSRP versus $583 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Xeon W3690 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.3% better PassMark. It is also 112.9% better value on MSRP (26.3 vs 12.3 PassMark/$), 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 E3-1241 v3 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Xeon E3-1241 v3 vs Xeon W3690 Technical Specifications

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

Xeon E3-1241 v3

The Xeon E3-1241 v3 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 May 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell-WS (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 80 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L-1333, DDR3L-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 7,169 points. Launch price was $273.

Xeon W3690

The Xeon W3690 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 February 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Gulftown (2010−2011) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.46 GHz, with boost up to 3.73 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1366. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 7,191 points. Launch price was $450.

⚡

Processing Power

The Xeon E3-1241 v3 packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon W3690 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Xeon W3690 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.9 GHz on the Xeon E3-1241 v3 versus 3.73 GHz on the Xeon W3690 — a 4.5% clock advantage for the Xeon E3-1241 v3 (base: 3.5 GHz vs 3.46 GHz). The Xeon E3-1241 v3 uses the Haswell-WS (2013−2014) architecture (22 nm), while the Xeon W3690 uses Gulftown (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Xeon E3-1241 v3 scores 7,169 against the Xeon W3690's 7,191 — a 0.3% lead for the Xeon W3690. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Xeon E3-1241 v3 vs 12 MB (total) on the Xeon W3690.

Feature	Xeon E3-1241 v3	Xeon W3690
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	6 / 12+50%
Boost Clock	3.9 GHz+5%	3.73 GHz
Base Clock	3.5 GHz+1%	3.46 GHz
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	12 MB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Haswell-WS (2013−2014)	Gulftown (2010−2011)
PassMark	7,169	7,191

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Xeon E3-1241 v3 uses the LGA1150 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Xeon W3690 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Xeon E3-1241 v3	Xeon W3690
Socket	LGA1150	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Xeon E3-1241 v3 was priced at $273, while the Xeon W3690 came in at $583. On launch pricing ($273 vs $583), Xeon E3-1241 v3 was $310 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Xeon E3-1241 v3 delivers 26.3 pts/$ vs 12.3 pts/$ for the Xeon W3690 — making the Xeon E3-1241 v3 the 72.2% better value option.

Feature	Xeon E3-1241 v3	Xeon W3690
MSRP	$273-53%	$583
Performance per Dollar	26.3+114%	12.3
Release Date	2014	2011

Search Xeon E3-1241 v3 on Amazon

Search Xeon W3690 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.