
Core 5 220H
Popular choices:

Xeon E5-2696 V3
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
About PassMark
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 220H
2024Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +12.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 45W instead of 145W, a 100W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FCBGA1744 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011-3 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (21,192 vs 21,435).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 45 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2696 V3, which brings 18 cores / 36 threads.
Xeon E5-2696 V3
2014Why buy it
- ✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
- ✅+150% larger total L3 cache (45 MB vs 18 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 18 cores / 36 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core 5 220H across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌222.2% higher power demand at 145W vs 45W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA2011-3 with DDR4, while Core 5 220H moves to FCBGA1744 and DDR5.
Core 5 220H
2024Xeon E5-2696 V3
2014Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +12.5% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 45W instead of 145W, a 100W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FCBGA1744 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011-3 and DDR4.
Why buy it
- ✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
- ✅+150% larger total L3 cache (45 MB vs 18 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 18 cores / 36 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (21,192 vs 21,435).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 45 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2696 V3, which brings 18 cores / 36 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core 5 220H across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌222.2% higher power demand at 145W vs 45W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA2011-3 with DDR4, while Core 5 220H moves to FCBGA1744 and DDR5.
Quick Answers
So, is Core 5 220H better than Xeon E5-2696 V3?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core 5 220H | Xeon E5-2696 V3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 277 FPS | 181 FPS |
| medium | 249 FPS | 158 FPS |
| high | 210 FPS | 126 FPS |
| ultra | 181 FPS | 101 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 230 FPS | 152 FPS |
| medium | 186 FPS | 128 FPS |
| high | 152 FPS | 99 FPS |
| ultra | 134 FPS | 81 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 161 FPS | 69 FPS |
| medium | 131 FPS | 62 FPS |
| high | 101 FPS | 48 FPS |
| ultra | 88 FPS | 39 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core 5 220H | Xeon E5-2696 V3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 434 FPS |
| medium | 521 FPS | 390 FPS |
| high | 427 FPS | 326 FPS |
| ultra | 385 FPS | 272 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 372 FPS |
| medium | 449 FPS | 335 FPS |
| high | 376 FPS | 283 FPS |
| ultra | 323 FPS | 228 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 330 FPS | 233 FPS |
| medium | 279 FPS | 210 FPS |
| high | 256 FPS | 190 FPS |
| ultra | 225 FPS | 154 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core 5 220H | Xeon E5-2696 V3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 536 FPS |
| medium | 530 FPS | 536 FPS |
| high | 530 FPS | 536 FPS |
| ultra | 530 FPS | 536 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 536 FPS |
| medium | 530 FPS | 536 FPS |
| high | 530 FPS | 536 FPS |
| ultra | 496 FPS | 534 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 479 FPS |
| medium | 492 FPS | 390 FPS |
| high | 439 FPS | 354 FPS |
| ultra | 370 FPS | 295 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core 5 220H | Xeon E5-2696 V3 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 536 FPS |
| medium | 530 FPS | 536 FPS |
| high | 530 FPS | 536 FPS |
| ultra | 530 FPS | 536 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 536 FPS |
| medium | 530 FPS | 536 FPS |
| high | 530 FPS | 536 FPS |
| ultra | 530 FPS | 515 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 530 FPS | 536 FPS |
| medium | 530 FPS | 528 FPS |
| high | 500 FPS | 466 FPS |
| ultra | 431 FPS | 396 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core 5 220H and Xeon E5-2696 V3

Core 5 220H
Core 5 220H
The Core 5 220H is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 18 December 2024 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-H (2023−2024) architecture. It features 12 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 18 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1744. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-5200, DDR4-3200, LPDDR4X-4267. Passmark benchmark score: 21,192 points. Launch price was $342.

Xeon E5-2696 V3
Xeon E5-2696 V3
The Xeon E5-2696 V3 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Haswell-EP (2014−2015) architecture. It features 18 cores and 36 threads. Base frequency is 2.3 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 45 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011-3. Thermal design power (TDP): 145 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4 2133 MHz Quad-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 21,435 points. Launch price was $800.
Processing Power
The Core 5 220H packs 12 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon E5-2696 V3 offers 18 cores / 36 threads — the Xeon E5-2696 V3 has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core 5 220H versus 3.8 GHz on the Xeon E5-2696 V3 — a 25.3% clock advantage for the Core 5 220H (base: 2.7 GHz vs 2.3 GHz). The Core 5 220H uses the Raptor Lake-H (2023−2024) architecture (10 nm), while the Xeon E5-2696 V3 uses Haswell-EP (2014−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Core 5 220H scores 21,192 against the Xeon E5-2696 V3's 21,435 — a 1.1% lead for the Xeon E5-2696 V3. L3 cache: 18 MB (total) on the Core 5 220H vs 45 MB (total) on the Xeon E5-2696 V3.
| Feature | Core 5 220H | Xeon E5-2696 V3 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 12 / 16 | 18 / 36+50% |
| Boost Clock | 4.9 GHz+29% | 3.8 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.7 GHz+17% | 2.3 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 18 MB (total) | 45 MB (total)+150% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core)+700% | 256K (per core) |
| Process | 10 nm-55% | 22 nm |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake-H (2023−2024) | Haswell-EP (2014−2015) |
| PassMark | 21,192 | 21,435+1% |
Memory & Platform
The Core 5 220H uses the FCBGA1744 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon E5-2696 V3 uses LGA2011-3 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core 5 220H | Xeon E5-2696 V3 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA1744 | LGA2011-3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+67% | PCIe 3.0 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












