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 5 120

2025

Why buy it

✅+0% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $2,551 less on MSRP ($340 MSRP vs $2,891 MSRP).
✅Delivers 750.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 63.6 vs 7.5 PassMark/$ ($340 MSRP vs $2,891 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 145W, a 80W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-2697A v4 across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 40 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2697A v4, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads.

Xeon E5-2697A v4

2016

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +10.4% higher average FPS across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+122.2% larger total L3 cache (40 MB vs 18 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (21,621 vs 21,629).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 7.5 vs 63.6 PassMark/$ ($2,891 MSRP vs $340 MSRP).
❌123.1% higher power demand at 145W vs 65W.
❌Older platform position on LGA2011 with DDR4, while Core 5 120 moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.

Core 5 120

2025

Xeon E5-2697A v4

2016

Why buy it

✅+0% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $2,551 less on MSRP ($340 MSRP vs $2,891 MSRP).
✅Delivers 750.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 63.6 vs 7.5 PassMark/$ ($340 MSRP vs $2,891 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 145W, a 80W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1700 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011 and DDR4.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +10.4% higher average FPS across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+122.2% larger total L3 cache (40 MB vs 18 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-2697A v4 across 49 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 40 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2697A v4, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (21,621 vs 21,629).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 7.5 vs 63.6 PassMark/$ ($2,891 MSRP vs $340 MSRP).
❌123.1% higher power demand at 145W vs 65W.
❌Older platform position on LGA2011 with DDR4, while Core 5 120 moves to LGA1700 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is Core 5 120 better than Xeon E5-2697A v4?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon E5-2697A v4 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core 5 120 is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core 5 120 is the better fit. You are getting 0% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads.

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

Core 5 120 is the smarter buy today. Core 5 120 is $2,551 cheaper on MSRP at $340 MSRP versus $2,891 MSRP, and it gives you 0% better PassMark. The trade-off is that Xeon E5-2697A v4 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 10.4% average FPS lead across 49 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 750.6% better value on MSRP (63.6 vs 7.5 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

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

Core 5 120 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2016), a healthier platform with LGA1700 and DDR5 instead of LGA2011, and more multi-core headroom with 6 cores / 12 threads instead of 16/32. 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 5 120 Benchmark Check

Xeon E5-2697A v4 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core 5 120	Xeon E5-2697A v4
1080p
low	170 FPS	182 FPS
medium	147 FPS	158 FPS
high	118 FPS	126 FPS
ultra	99 FPS	101 FPS
1440p
low	145 FPS	152 FPS
medium	123 FPS	128 FPS
high	99 FPS	99 FPS
ultra	83 FPS	80 FPS
4K
low	79 FPS	69 FPS
medium	72 FPS	62 FPS
high	57 FPS	48 FPS
ultra	44 FPS	39 FPS

Open Core 5 120 Open Xeon E5-2697A v4

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core 5 120	Xeon E5-2697A v4
1080p
low	471 FPS	364 FPS
medium	401 FPS	330 FPS
high	338 FPS	279 FPS
ultra	298 FPS	224 FPS
1440p
low	409 FPS	313 FPS
medium	355 FPS	284 FPS
high	309 FPS	242 FPS
ultra	264 FPS	188 FPS
4K
low	274 FPS	195 FPS
medium	243 FPS	178 FPS
high	223 FPS	153 FPS
ultra	191 FPS	120 FPS

Open Core 5 120 Open Xeon E5-2697A v4

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core 5 120	Xeon E5-2697A v4
1080p
low	541 FPS	541 FPS
medium	541 FPS	541 FPS
high	541 FPS	541 FPS
ultra	496 FPS	541 FPS
1440p
low	541 FPS	541 FPS
medium	491 FPS	541 FPS
high	445 FPS	541 FPS
ultra	388 FPS	532 FPS
4K
low	411 FPS	466 FPS
medium	347 FPS	379 FPS
high	303 FPS	345 FPS
ultra	244 FPS	289 FPS

Open Core 5 120 Open Xeon E5-2697A v4

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core 5 120	Xeon E5-2697A v4
1080p
low	541 FPS	541 FPS
medium	541 FPS	541 FPS
high	541 FPS	541 FPS
ultra	541 FPS	541 FPS
1440p
low	541 FPS	541 FPS
medium	541 FPS	541 FPS
high	541 FPS	541 FPS
ultra	534 FPS	497 FPS
4K
low	541 FPS	541 FPS
medium	499 FPS	515 FPS
high	440 FPS	455 FPS
ultra	376 FPS	381 FPS

Open Core 5 120 Open Xeon E5-2697A v4

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core 5 120 and Xeon E5-2697A v4

Core 5 120

The Core 5 120 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 31 July 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-R (2023−2025) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.5 GHz. L3 cache: 18 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 21,629 points. Launch price was $211.

Xeon E5-2697A v4

The Xeon E5-2697A 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 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 40 MB. L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 145 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-1600, DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 21,621 points. Launch price was $2,891.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core 5 120 packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Xeon E5-2697A v4 offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Xeon E5-2697A v4 has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.5 GHz on the Core 5 120 versus 3.6 GHz on the Xeon E5-2697A v4 — a 22.2% clock advantage for the Core 5 120 (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The Core 5 120 uses the Raptor Lake-R (2023−2025) architecture (10 nm), while the Xeon E5-2697A v4 uses Broadwell (2015−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core 5 120 scores 21,629 against the Xeon E5-2697A v4's 21,621 — a 0% lead for the Core 5 120. L3 cache: 18 MB (total) on the Core 5 120 vs 40 MB on the Xeon E5-2697A v4.

Feature	Core 5 120	Xeon E5-2697A v4
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	16 / 32+167%
Boost Clock	4.5 GHz+25%	3.6 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz	2.6 GHz+4%
L3 Cache	18 MB (total)	40 MB+122%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)	4 MB+220%
Process	10 nm-29%	14 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake-R (2023−2025)	Broadwell (2015−2019)
PassMark	21,629	21,621

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core 5 120 uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon E5-2697A v4 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core 5 120	Xeon E5-2697A v4
Socket	LGA1700	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+67%	PCIe 3.0

💰

Value Analysis

The Core 5 120 launched at $340 MSRP, while the Xeon E5-2697A v4 debuted at $2891. On MSRP ($340 vs $2891), the Core 5 120 is $2551 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core 5 120 delivers 63.6 pts/$ vs 7.5 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2697A v4 — making the Core 5 120 the 157.9% better value option.