Xeon E3-1275 v5 vs Xeon E3-1280 v5

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 E3-1275 v5 vs Xeon E3-1280 v5 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 E3-1275 v5 vs Xeon E3-1280 v5: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Xeon E3-1275 v5

2015

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E3-1280 v5 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Xeon E3-1280 v5

2015

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (8,254 vs 8,291).

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E3-1275 v5 better than Xeon E3-1280 v5?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Xeon E3-1280 v5 is ahead with a 7.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E3-1275 v5 pulls ahead with 0.4% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E3-1275 v5 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads.

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

Xeon E3-1275 v5 still makes the most sense overall. Xeon E3-1275 v5 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.4% better PassMark.

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

Xeon E3-1275 v5 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 8 threads instead of 4/8. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Xeon E3-1275 v5 vs Xeon E3-1280 v5 Technical Specifications

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

Xeon E3-1275 v5

The Xeon E3-1275 v5 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 19 October 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Skylake-DT (2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 80 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-1866/2133, DDR3L-1333/1600. Passmark benchmark score: 8,291 points. Launch price was $350.

Xeon E3-1280 v5

The Xeon E3-1280 v5 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 19 October 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Skylake-S (2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 80 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 8,254 points. Launch price was $612.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Xeon E3-1275 v5 and Xeon E3-1280 v5 share an identical 4-core/8-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the Xeon E3-1275 v5 versus 4 GHz on the Xeon E3-1280 v5 — identical boost frequencies (base: 3.6 GHz vs 3.7 GHz). The Xeon E3-1275 v5 uses the Skylake-DT (2015) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E3-1280 v5 uses Skylake-S (2015) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Xeon E3-1275 v5 scores 8,291 against the Xeon E3-1280 v5's 8,254 — a 0.4% lead for the Xeon E3-1275 v5. Both processors carry 8 MB (total) of L3 cache.

Feature	Xeon E3-1275 v5	Xeon E3-1280 v5
Cores / Threads	4 / 8	4 / 8
Boost Clock	4 GHz	4 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz	3.7 GHz+3%
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	8 MB (total)
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	256K (per core)
Process	14 nm	14 nm
Architecture	Skylake-DT (2015)	Skylake-S (2015)
PassMark	8,291	8,254