
Core Ultra 7 265HX
Popular choices:

Xeon 6736P
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 265HX
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +14.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $2,901 less on MSRP ($450 MSRP vs $3,351 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 628.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 108.8 vs 14.9 PassMark/$ ($450 MSRP vs $3,351 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 205W, a 150W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, while Xeon 6736P needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (48,975 vs 50,072).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (30 MB vs 144 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon 6736P, which brings 36 cores / 72 threads and 88 PCIe lanes.
Xeon 6736P
2025Why buy it
- ✅+2.2% higher PassMark.
- ✅+380% larger total L3 cache (144 MB vs 30 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 36 cores / 72 threads, plus 88 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅340% more PCIe lanes (88 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 265HX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 14.9 vs 108.8 PassMark/$ ($3,351 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
- ❌272.7% higher power demand at 205W vs 55W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 265HX can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Core Ultra 7 265HX
2025Xeon 6736P
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +14.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $2,901 less on MSRP ($450 MSRP vs $3,351 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 628.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 108.8 vs 14.9 PassMark/$ ($450 MSRP vs $3,351 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 55W instead of 205W, a 150W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, while Xeon 6736P needs a discrete GPU.
Why buy it
- ✅+2.2% higher PassMark.
- ✅+380% larger total L3 cache (144 MB vs 30 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 36 cores / 72 threads, plus 88 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅340% more PCIe lanes (88 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (48,975 vs 50,072).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (30 MB vs 144 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon 6736P, which brings 36 cores / 72 threads and 88 PCIe lanes.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 265HX across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 14.9 vs 108.8 PassMark/$ ($3,351 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
- ❌272.7% higher power demand at 205W vs 55W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 265HX can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is Core Ultra 7 265HX better than Xeon 6736P?
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 265HX | Xeon 6736P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 280 FPS | 188 FPS |
| medium | 273 FPS | 165 FPS |
| high | 228 FPS | 131 FPS |
| ultra | 192 FPS | 106 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 226 FPS | 155 FPS |
| medium | 194 FPS | 131 FPS |
| high | 156 FPS | 100 FPS |
| ultra | 136 FPS | 82 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 151 FPS | 70 FPS |
| medium | 129 FPS | 63 FPS |
| high | 100 FPS | 49 FPS |
| ultra | 87 FPS | 40 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core Ultra 7 265HX | Xeon 6736P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 696 FPS | 320 FPS |
| medium | 595 FPS | 283 FPS |
| high | 499 FPS | 236 FPS |
| ultra | 450 FPS | 207 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 607 FPS | 268 FPS |
| medium | 540 FPS | 240 FPS |
| high | 453 FPS | 206 FPS |
| ultra | 385 FPS | 171 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 357 FPS | 167 FPS |
| medium | 325 FPS | 152 FPS |
| high | 305 FPS | 141 FPS |
| ultra | 266 FPS | 125 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core Ultra 7 265HX | Xeon 6736P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 839 FPS | 900 FPS |
| medium | 685 FPS | 829 FPS |
| high | 610 FPS | 768 FPS |
| ultra | 522 FPS | 677 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 727 FPS | 770 FPS |
| medium | 596 FPS | 706 FPS |
| high | 519 FPS | 650 FPS |
| ultra | 441 FPS | 581 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 515 FPS | 510 FPS |
| medium | 434 FPS | 429 FPS |
| high | 394 FPS | 383 FPS |
| ultra | 336 FPS | 318 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core Ultra 7 265HX | Xeon 6736P |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 998 FPS | 972 FPS |
| medium | 903 FPS | 876 FPS |
| high | 784 FPS | 755 FPS |
| ultra | 712 FPS | 655 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 817 FPS | 792 FPS |
| medium | 726 FPS | 690 FPS |
| high | 628 FPS | 593 FPS |
| ultra | 558 FPS | 509 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 557 FPS | 571 FPS |
| medium | 503 FPS | 513 FPS |
| high | 451 FPS | 454 FPS |
| ultra | 398 FPS | 391 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core Ultra 7 265HX and Xeon 6736P

Core Ultra 7 265HX
Core Ultra 7 265HX
The Core Ultra 7 265HX is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2025-01-01. It is based on the Arrow Lake-HX (2025) architecture. It features 20 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 5.3 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2114. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 48,975 points. Launch price was $500.

Xeon 6736P
Xeon 6736P
The Xeon 6736P is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 February 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Granite Rapids (2024−2025) architecture. It features 36 cores and 72 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 4.1 GHz. L3 cache: 144 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4710. Thermal design power (TDP): 205 Watt. Memory support: DDR5(6400MT/s). Passmark benchmark score: 50,072 points. Launch price was $3,351.
Processing Power
The Core Ultra 7 265HX packs 20 cores / 20 threads, while the Xeon 6736P offers 36 cores / 72 threads — the Xeon 6736P has 16 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.3 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 265HX versus 4.1 GHz on the Xeon 6736P — a 25.5% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 7 265HX (base: 2.6 GHz vs 2 GHz). The Core Ultra 7 265HX uses the Arrow Lake-HX (2025) architecture (3 nm), while the Xeon 6736P uses Granite Rapids (2024−2025) (Intel 3 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 7 265HX scores 48,975 against the Xeon 6736P's 50,072 — a 2.2% lead for the Xeon 6736P. L3 cache: 30 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 7 265HX vs 144 MB (total) on the Xeon 6736P.
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 265HX | Xeon 6736P |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 20 / 20 | 36 / 72+80% |
| Boost Clock | 5.3 GHz+29% | 4.1 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.6 GHz+30% | 2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 30 MB (total) | 144 MB (total)+380% |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB (per core)+50% | 2 MB (per core) |
| Process | 3 nm | Intel 3 nm |
| Architecture | Arrow Lake-HX (2025) | Granite Rapids (2024−2025) |
| PassMark | 48,975 | 50,072+2% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 2,990 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 17,417 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Core Ultra 7 265HX uses the FCBGA2114 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon 6736P uses LGA4710 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6400 on the Core Ultra 7 265HX versus 6400 on the Xeon 6736P — the Xeon 6736P supports 199.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon 6736P supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 192 GB — 182.1% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core Ultra 7 265HX) vs 8 (Xeon 6736P). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core Ultra 7 265HX) vs 88 (Xeon 6736P) — the Xeon 6736P offers 68 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: WM880,HM870 (Core Ultra 7 265HX) and Granite Rapids-SP (Xeon 6736P).
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 265HX | Xeon 6736P |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA2114 | LGA4710 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR5-6400 | 6400+127900% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 GB+4915100% | 4096 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 8+300% |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 88+340% |
Advanced Features
Only the Core Ultra 7 265HX has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Both support AVX-512 instructions, benefiting scientific computing, AI inference, and encryption workloads. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core Ultra 7 265HX includes integrated graphics (Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU), while the Xeon 6736P requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Xeon 6736P rivals EPYC 9684X.
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 265HX | Xeon 6736P |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU | None |
| Unlocked | Yes | No |
| AVX-512 | Yes | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d |
Value Analysis
The Core Ultra 7 265HX launched at $450 MSRP, while the Xeon 6736P debuted at $3351. On MSRP ($450 vs $3351), the Core Ultra 7 265HX is $2901 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core Ultra 7 265HX delivers 108.8 pts/$ vs 14.9 pts/$ for the Xeon 6736P — making the Core Ultra 7 265HX the 151.7% better value option.
| Feature | Core Ultra 7 265HX | Xeon 6736P |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $450-87% | $3351 |
| Performance per Dollar | 108.8+630% | 14.9 |
| Release Date | 2025 | 2025 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













