
Core Ultra 7 265H
Popular choices:

Xeon Gold 6238R
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 Ultra 7 265H
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +29.6% higher average FPS across 31 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 26W instead of 165W, a 139W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FCBGA2049 with DDR5 support instead of LGA3647 and DDR4.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc 140T GPU, while Xeon Gold 6238R needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (34,702 vs 34,751).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 39 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon Gold 6238R, which brings 28 cores / 56 threads and 48 PCIe lanes.
Xeon Gold 6238R
2020Why buy it
- ✅+0.1% higher PassMark.
- ✅+60.4% larger total L3 cache (39 MB vs 24 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 28 cores / 56 threads, plus 48 PCIe lanes vs 28.
- ✅71.4% more PCIe lanes (48 vs 28) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 265H across 31 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $2,612 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 265H mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌534.6% higher power demand at 165W vs 26W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA3647 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 7 265H moves to FCBGA2049 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 265H can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core Ultra 7 265H
2025Xeon Gold 6238R
2020Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +29.6% higher average FPS across 31 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 26W instead of 165W, a 139W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FCBGA2049 with DDR5 support instead of LGA3647 and DDR4.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc 140T GPU, while Xeon Gold 6238R needs a discrete GPU.
Why buy it
- ✅+0.1% higher PassMark.
- ✅+60.4% larger total L3 cache (39 MB vs 24 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 28 cores / 56 threads, plus 48 PCIe lanes vs 28.
- ✅71.4% more PCIe lanes (48 vs 28) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (34,702 vs 34,751).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 39 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon Gold 6238R, which brings 28 cores / 56 threads and 48 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 265H across 31 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $2,612 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 265H mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌534.6% higher power demand at 165W vs 26W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA3647 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 7 265H moves to FCBGA2049 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 265H can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is Core Ultra 7 265H better than Xeon Gold 6238R?
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 Ultra 7 265H | Xeon Gold 6238R |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 310 FPS | 196 FPS |
| medium | 280 FPS | 158 FPS |
| high | 234 FPS | 128 FPS |
| ultra | 199 FPS | 100 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 252 FPS | 157 FPS |
| medium | 202 FPS | 123 FPS |
| high | 164 FPS | 96 FPS |
| ultra | 143 FPS | 76 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 174 FPS | 72 FPS |
| medium | 140 FPS | 60 FPS |
| high | 108 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 94 FPS | 38 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core Ultra 7 265H | Xeon Gold 6238R |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 862 FPS | 233 FPS |
| medium | 658 FPS | 207 FPS |
| high | 534 FPS | 174 FPS |
| ultra | 469 FPS | 145 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 734 FPS | 200 FPS |
| medium | 588 FPS | 180 FPS |
| high | 481 FPS | 153 FPS |
| ultra | 398 FPS | 123 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 428 FPS | 125 FPS |
| medium | 351 FPS | 114 FPS |
| high | 321 FPS | 104 FPS |
| ultra | 275 FPS | 86 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core Ultra 7 265H | Xeon Gold 6238R |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 868 FPS | 869 FPS |
| medium | 868 FPS | 869 FPS |
| high | 780 FPS | 833 FPS |
| ultra | 662 FPS | 753 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 868 FPS | 761 FPS |
| medium | 735 FPS | 676 FPS |
| high | 635 FPS | 635 FPS |
| ultra | 544 FPS | 569 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 642 FPS | 492 FPS |
| medium | 534 FPS | 406 FPS |
| high | 483 FPS | 357 FPS |
| ultra | 409 FPS | 292 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core Ultra 7 265H | Xeon Gold 6238R |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 868 FPS | 869 FPS |
| medium | 868 FPS | 816 FPS |
| high | 868 FPS | 703 FPS |
| ultra | 783 FPS | 613 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 868 FPS | 716 FPS |
| medium | 804 FPS | 628 FPS |
| high | 704 FPS | 539 FPS |
| ultra | 610 FPS | 466 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 613 FPS | 521 FPS |
| medium | 541 FPS | 465 FPS |
| high | 489 FPS | 408 FPS |
| ultra | 428 FPS | 351 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core Ultra 7 265H and Xeon Gold 6238R

Core Ultra 7 265H
Core Ultra 7 265H
The Core Ultra 7 265H is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-H (2025) architecture. It features 16 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 4.5 GHz, with boost up to 5.3 GHz. L3 cache: 24 MB. Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2049. Thermal design power (TDP): 26 MB + 24 MB. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 34,702 points. Launch price was $471.

Xeon Gold 6238R
Xeon Gold 6238R
The Xeon Gold 6238R is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 February 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Cascade Lake (2019−2020) architecture. It features 28 cores and 56 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 38.5 MB. L2 cache: 28 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 165 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 34,751 points. Launch price was $2,612.
Processing Power
The Core Ultra 7 265H packs 16 cores / 16 threads, while the Xeon Gold 6238R offers 28 cores / 56 threads — the Xeon Gold 6238R has 12 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.3 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 265H versus 4 GHz on the Xeon Gold 6238R — a 28% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 7 265H (base: 4.5 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The Core Ultra 7 265H uses the Arrow Lake-H (2025) architecture (5 nm), while the Xeon Gold 6238R uses Cascade Lake (2019−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 7 265H scores 34,702 against the Xeon Gold 6238R's 34,751 — a 0.1% lead for the Xeon Gold 6238R. L3 cache: 24 MB on the Core Ultra 7 265H vs 38.5 MB on the Xeon Gold 6238R.
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 265H | Xeon Gold 6238R |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 16 / 16 | 28 / 56+75% |
| Boost Clock | 5.3 GHz+32% | 4 GHz |
| Base Clock | 4.5 GHz+105% | 2.2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 24 MB | 38.5 MB+60% |
| L2 Cache | — | 28 MB |
| Process | 5 nm-64% | 14 nm |
| Architecture | Arrow Lake-H (2025) | Cascade Lake (2019−2020) |
| PassMark | 34,702 | 34,751 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 21,433 |
Memory & Platform
The Core Ultra 7 265H uses the FCBGA2049 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon Gold 6238R uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 8400 on the Core Ultra 7 265H versus DDR4-2933 on the Xeon Gold 6238R — the Core Ultra 7 265H supports 199.8% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core Ultra 7 265H supports up to 128 of RAM compared to 1 TB — 196.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core Ultra 7 265H) vs 6 (Xeon Gold 6238R). PCIe lanes: 28 (Core Ultra 7 265H) vs 48 (Xeon Gold 6238R) — the Xeon Gold 6238R offers 20 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: BGA 2049 (Core Ultra 7 265H) and C621,C622,C624,C627,C628 (Xeon Gold 6238R).
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 265H | Xeon Gold 6238R |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA2049 | LGA3647 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+67% | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | 8400+209900% | DDR4-2933 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 | 1 TB+838860700% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 6+200% |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 28 | 48+71% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 7 265H) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon Gold 6238R). The Core Ultra 7 265H includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc 140T GPU), while the Xeon Gold 6238R requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Xeon Gold 6238R targets Server. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 7 265H rivals Ryzen AI 9 HX 370; Xeon Gold 6238R rivals Xeon Gold 6248R.
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 265H | Xeon Gold 6238R |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Intel Arc 140T GPU | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | Yes | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d, EPT |
| Target Use | — | Server |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













