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 E3-1265L v4 vs Xeon X5680 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 E3-1265L v4 vs Xeon X5680: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Xeon E3-1265L v4

2015

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $33 less on MSRP ($417 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
✅Delivers 8.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 16.7 vs 15.4 PassMark/$ ($417 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
✅Draws 35W instead of 130W, a 95W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon X5680 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (6 MB vs 12 MB).

Xeon X5680

2010

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (6,910 vs 6,954).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.4 vs 16.7 PassMark/$ ($450 MSRP vs $417 MSRP).
❌271.4% higher power demand at 130W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Xeon E3-1265L v4 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E3-1265L v4 better than Xeon X5680?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Xeon X5680 is ahead with a 3.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E3-1265L v4 pulls ahead with 0.6% better PassMark. Xeon X5680 also has the bigger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E3-1265L v4 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads.

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

Xeon E3-1265L v4 is the better buy right now. Xeon E3-1265L v4 comes in $33 cheaper on MSRP at $417 MSRP versus $450 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.6% better PassMark. The compromise is that Xeon X5680 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 3.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 8.6% better value on MSRP (16.7 vs 15.4 PassMark/$), 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 E3-1265L v4 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2010) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 8 threads instead of 6/12. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Xeon E3-1265L v4 vs Xeon X5680 Technical Specifications

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

Xeon E3-1265L v4

The Xeon E3-1265L v4 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Broadwell-DT (2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.3 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L-1333, DDR3L-1600, DDR3L-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 6,954 points. Launch price was $800.

Xeon X5680

The Xeon X5680 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 February 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Westmere-EP (2010−2011) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.33 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 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: 6,910 points. Launch price was $172.

⚡

Processing Power

The Xeon E3-1265L v4 packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon X5680 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Xeon X5680 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.3 GHz on the Xeon E3-1265L v4 versus 3.6 GHz on the Xeon X5680 — a 8.7% clock advantage for the Xeon X5680 (base: 2.3 GHz vs 3.33 GHz). The Xeon E3-1265L v4 uses the Broadwell-DT (2015) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon X5680 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Xeon E3-1265L v4 scores 6,954 against the Xeon X5680's 6,910 — a 0.6% lead for the Xeon E3-1265L v4. L3 cache: 6 MB (total) on the Xeon E3-1265L v4 vs 12 MB (total) on the Xeon X5680.

Feature	Xeon E3-1265L v4	Xeon X5680
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	6 / 12+50%
Boost Clock	3.3 GHz	3.6 GHz+9%
Base Clock	2.3 GHz	3.33 GHz+45%
L3 Cache	6 MB (total)	12 MB (total)+100%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-56%	32 nm
Architecture	Broadwell-DT (2015)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	6,954	6,910
Cinebench R23 Multi	4,500	—
Geekbench 6 Single	900	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	3,000	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Xeon E3-1265L v4 uses the LGA1150 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon X5680 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1866 on the Xeon E3-1265L v4 versus DDR3-1333 on the Xeon X5680 — the Xeon E3-1265L v4 supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Xeon E3-1265L v4) vs 3 (Xeon X5680). Chipset compatibility: C226 (Xeon E3-1265L v4) and Intel X58,Intel 5520 (Xeon X5680).

Feature	Xeon E3-1265L v4	Xeon X5680
Socket	LGA1150	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+150%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1866+40%	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	3+50%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Xeon E3-1265L v4) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon X5680). The Xeon E3-1265L v4 includes integrated graphics (Iris Pro Graphics P6300), while the Xeon X5680 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Xeon E3-1265L v4 targets Server, Xeon X5680 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Xeon X5680 rivals Core i7-980X.

Feature	Xeon E3-1265L v4	Xeon X5680
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Iris Pro Graphics P6300	—
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	Server	Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Xeon E3-1265L v4 was priced at $417, while the Xeon X5680 came in at $450. On launch pricing ($417 vs $450), Xeon E3-1265L v4 was $33 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Xeon E3-1265L v4 delivers 16.7 pts/$ vs 15.4 pts/$ for the Xeon X5680 — making the Xeon E3-1265L v4 the 8.2% better value option.

Feature	Xeon E3-1265L v4	Xeon X5680
MSRP	$417-7%	$450
Performance per Dollar	16.7+8%	15.4
Release Date	2015	2010

Search Xeon E3-1265L v4 on Amazon

Search Xeon X5680 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.