Xeon E5-4640 vs Xeon W3680

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 E5-4640 vs Xeon W3680 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 E5-4640 vs Xeon W3680: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Xeon E5-4640

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.2% higher average FPS across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+66.7% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Draws 95W instead of 130W, a 35W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (7,012 vs 7,025).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 2.6 vs 11.8 PassMark/$ ($2,725 MSRP vs $594 MSRP).

Xeon W3680

2010

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $2,131 less on MSRP ($594 MSRP vs $2,725 MSRP).
✅Delivers 359.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 11.8 vs 2.6 PassMark/$ ($594 MSRP vs $2,725 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-4640 across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 20 MB).
❌36.8% higher power demand at 130W vs 95W.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E5-4640 better than Xeon W3680?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Xeon E5-4640 is ahead with a 3.2% average FPS lead across 49 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Xeon W3680 pulls ahead with 0.2% better PassMark. Xeon E5-4640 also has the bigger cache pool with 66.7% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 12 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon W3680 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 E5-4640 is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon W3680 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. Xeon E5-4640 comes in 358.8% more expensive on MSRP at $2,725 MSRP versus $594 MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.2% average FPS lead across 49 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Xeon W3680 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.2% better PassMark. Xeon W3680 is also 359.6% better value on MSRP (11.8 vs 2.6 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

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

Xeon E5-4640 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2010) and 66.7% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 12 MB). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Xeon E5-4640 vs Xeon W3680 Technical Specifications

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

Xeon E5-4640

The Xeon E5-4640 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 May 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge-EP (2012) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 20480 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 7,012 points. Launch price was $2,730.

Xeon W3680

The Xeon W3680 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 16 March 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Gulftown (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: 7,025 points. Launch price was $350.

⚡

Processing Power

The Xeon E5-4640 packs 8 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon W3680 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Xeon E5-4640 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Xeon E5-4640 versus 3.6 GHz on the Xeon W3680 — a 25% clock advantage for the Xeon W3680 (base: 2.4 GHz vs 3.33 GHz). The Xeon E5-4640 uses the Sandy Bridge-EP (2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Xeon W3680 uses Gulftown (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Xeon E5-4640 scores 7,012 against the Xeon W3680's 7,025 — a 0.2% lead for the Xeon W3680. L3 cache: 20480 kB (total) on the Xeon E5-4640 vs 12 MB (total) on the Xeon W3680.

Feature	Xeon E5-4640	Xeon W3680
Cores / Threads	8 / 16+33%	6 / 12
Boost Clock	2.8 GHz	3.6 GHz+29%
Base Clock	2.4 GHz	3.33 GHz+39%
L3 Cache	20480 kB (total)+67%	12 MB (total)
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	256 kB (per core)
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Sandy Bridge-EP (2012)	Gulftown (2010−2011)
PassMark	7,012	7,025

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Xeon E5-4640 uses the LGA2011 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon W3680 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Xeon E5-4640	Xeon W3680
Socket	LGA2011	LGA1366
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+150%	PCIe 2.0

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Xeon E5-4640 was priced at $2725, while the Xeon W3680 came in at $594. On launch pricing ($2725 vs $594), Xeon W3680 was $2131 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Xeon E5-4640 delivers 2.6 pts/$ vs 11.8 pts/$ for the Xeon W3680 — making the Xeon W3680 the 128.5% better value option.

Feature	Xeon E5-4640	Xeon W3680
MSRP	$2725	$594-78%
Performance per Dollar	2.6	11.8+354%
Release Date	2012	2010

Search Xeon E5-4640 on Amazon

Search Xeon W3680 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.