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.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Core 3 100HL

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,835 less on MSRP ($306 MSRP vs $2,141 MSRP).
✅Delivers 597.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 57.5 vs 8.2 PassMark/$ ($306 MSRP vs $2,141 MSRP).
✅Draws 45W instead of 160W, a 115W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-2687W v4 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (17,586 vs 17,640).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 30 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2687W v4, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.

Xeon E5-2687W v4

2016

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+150% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 0.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 8.2 vs 57.5 PassMark/$ ($2,141 MSRP vs $306 MSRP).
❌255.6% higher power demand at 160W vs 45W.
❌Older platform position on LGA2011 with DDR4, while Core 3 100HL moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.

Core 3 100HL

2024

Xeon E5-2687W v4

2016

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,835 less on MSRP ($306 MSRP vs $2,141 MSRP).
✅Delivers 597.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 57.5 vs 8.2 PassMark/$ ($306 MSRP vs $2,141 MSRP).
✅Draws 45W instead of 160W, a 115W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011 and DDR4.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+150% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 12 cores / 24 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 0.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-2687W v4 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (17,586 vs 17,640).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 30 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2687W v4, which brings 12 cores / 24 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 8.2 vs 57.5 PassMark/$ ($2,141 MSRP vs $306 MSRP).
❌255.6% higher power demand at 160W vs 45W.
❌Older platform position on LGA2011 with DDR4, while Core 3 100HL moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E5-2687W v4 better than Core 3 100HL?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon E5-2687W v4 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core 3 100HL is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Xeon E5-2687W v4 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 6.5% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E5-2687W v4 is the better fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 12 cores and 24 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 150% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 12 MB).

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

Xeon E5-2687W v4 is still the faster CPU overall, but Core 3 100HL makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Xeon E5-2687W v4 is 599.7% more expensive on MSRP at $2,141 MSRP versus $306 MSRP, and it gives you a 6.5% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core 3 100HL is also 597.5% better value on MSRP (57.5 vs 8.2 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

Core 3 100HL is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2016) and a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of LGA2011. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core 3 100HL Benchmark Check

Xeon E5-2687W v4 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core 3 100HL	Xeon E5-2687W v4
1080p
low	177 FPS	163 FPS
medium	144 FPS	141 FPS
high	119 FPS	114 FPS
ultra	97 FPS	93 FPS
1440p
low	144 FPS	137 FPS
medium	114 FPS	116 FPS
high	94 FPS	90 FPS
ultra	77 FPS	73 FPS
4K
low	79 FPS	63 FPS
medium	68 FPS	57 FPS
high	54 FPS	44 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	35 FPS

Open Core 3 100HL Open Xeon E5-2687W v4

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core 3 100HL	Xeon E5-2687W v4
1080p
low	201 FPS	326 FPS
medium	171 FPS	295 FPS
high	155 FPS	255 FPS
ultra	136 FPS	210 FPS
1440p
low	177 FPS	282 FPS
medium	155 FPS	258 FPS
high	143 FPS	224 FPS
ultra	123 FPS	183 FPS
4K
low	138 FPS	183 FPS
medium	125 FPS	167 FPS
high	118 FPS	145 FPS
ultra	102 FPS	115 FPS

Open Core 3 100HL Open Xeon E5-2687W v4

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core 3 100HL	Xeon E5-2687W v4
1080p
low	440 FPS	441 FPS
medium	440 FPS	441 FPS
high	440 FPS	441 FPS
ultra	440 FPS	441 FPS
1440p
low	440 FPS	441 FPS
medium	440 FPS	441 FPS
high	440 FPS	441 FPS
ultra	387 FPS	441 FPS
4K
low	439 FPS	441 FPS
medium	350 FPS	375 FPS
high	312 FPS	341 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	284 FPS

Open Core 3 100HL Open Xeon E5-2687W v4

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core 3 100HL	Xeon E5-2687W v4
1080p
low	440 FPS	441 FPS
medium	440 FPS	441 FPS
high	440 FPS	441 FPS
ultra	440 FPS	441 FPS
1440p
low	440 FPS	441 FPS
medium	440 FPS	441 FPS
high	440 FPS	441 FPS
ultra	440 FPS	441 FPS
4K
low	440 FPS	441 FPS
medium	440 FPS	441 FPS
high	440 FPS	415 FPS
ultra	391 FPS	348 FPS

Open Core 3 100HL Open Xeon E5-2687W v4

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core 3 100HL and Xeon E5-2687W v4

Core 3 100HL

The Core 3 100HL is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 April 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-PS (2024) architecture. It features 8 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 4.6 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 17,586 points. Launch price was $299.

Xeon E5-2687W v4

The Xeon E5-2687W v4 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 June 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB. L2 cache: 3 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 160 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 17,640 points. Launch price was $2,141.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core 3 100HL packs 8 cores / 12 threads, while the Xeon E5-2687W v4 offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the Xeon E5-2687W v4 has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core 3 100HL versus 3.5 GHz on the Xeon E5-2687W v4 — a 27.2% clock advantage for the Core 3 100HL (base: 2.1 GHz vs 3 GHz). The Core 3 100HL uses the Raptor Lake-PS (2024) architecture (10 nm), while the Xeon E5-2687W v4 uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core 3 100HL scores 17,586 against the Xeon E5-2687W v4's 17,640 — a 0.3% lead for the Xeon E5-2687W v4. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core 3 100HL vs 30 MB on the Xeon E5-2687W v4.

Feature	Core 3 100HL	Xeon E5-2687W v4
Cores / Threads	8 / 12	12 / 24+50%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz+31%	3.5 GHz
Base Clock	2.1 GHz	3 GHz+43%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	30 MB+150%
L2 Cache	2 MB (per core)	3 MB+50%
Process	10 nm-29%	14 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake-PS (2024)	Broadwell (2015−2019)
PassMark	17,586	17,640
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,063
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	8,255

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core 3 100HL uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon E5-2687W v4 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core 3 100HL	Xeon E5-2687W v4
Socket	LGA1700	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+67%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR4-2400
Max RAM Capacity	—	1536 GB
RAM Channels	—	4
ECC Support	—	Yes
PCIe Lanes	—	40

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Core 3 100HL) / Yes (Xeon E5-2687W v4).

Feature	Core 3 100HL	Xeon E5-2687W v4
Integrated GPU	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	Yes

💰

Value Analysis

The Core 3 100HL launched at $306 MSRP, while the Xeon E5-2687W v4 debuted at $2141. On MSRP ($306 vs $2141), the Core 3 100HL is $1835 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core 3 100HL delivers 57.5 pts/$ vs 8.2 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2687W v4 — making the Core 3 100HL the 149.8% better value option.