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

2025

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,539 less on MSRP ($450 MSRP vs $1,989 MSRP).
✅Delivers 341.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 108.8 vs 24.6 PassMark/$ ($450 MSRP vs $1,989 MSRP).
✅Draws 55W instead of 270W, a 215W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, while Xeon w7-3445 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (48,975 vs 48,991).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (30 MB vs 53 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon w7-3445, which brings 20 cores / 40 threads and 112 PCIe lanes.

Xeon w7-3445

2023

Why buy it

✅+0% higher PassMark.
✅+75% larger total L3 cache (53 MB vs 30 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 20 cores / 40 threads, plus 112 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅460% more PCIe lanes (112 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 24.6 vs 108.8 PassMark/$ ($1,989 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
❌390.9% higher power demand at 270W vs 55W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 265HX can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core Ultra 7 265HX

2025

Xeon w7-3445

2023

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,539 less on MSRP ($450 MSRP vs $1,989 MSRP).
✅Delivers 341.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 108.8 vs 24.6 PassMark/$ ($450 MSRP vs $1,989 MSRP).
✅Draws 55W instead of 270W, a 215W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, while Xeon w7-3445 needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅+0% higher PassMark.
✅+75% larger total L3 cache (53 MB vs 30 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 20 cores / 40 threads, plus 112 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅460% more PCIe lanes (112 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (48,975 vs 48,991).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (30 MB vs 53 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon w7-3445, which brings 20 cores / 40 threads and 112 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 24.6 vs 108.8 PassMark/$ ($1,989 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
❌390.9% higher power demand at 270W 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 w7-3445?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon w7-3445 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core Ultra 7 265HX 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, Xeon w7-3445 is the better fit. You are getting 0% better PassMark, backed by 20 cores and 40 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 75% larger total L3 cache (53 MB vs 30 MB).

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

Core Ultra 7 265HX is the smarter buy today. Core Ultra 7 265HX is $1,539 cheaper on MSRP at $450 MSRP versus $1,989 MSRP, and it gives you a 1.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Xeon w7-3445 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0% better PassMark. It is also 341.9% better value on MSRP (108.8 vs 24.6 PassMark/$), 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 Ultra 7 265HX is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2023). 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 Ultra 7 265HX Benchmark Check

Xeon w7-3445 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core Ultra 7 265HX	Xeon w7-3445
1080p
low	280 FPS	311 FPS
medium	273 FPS	301 FPS
high	228 FPS	242 FPS
ultra	192 FPS	203 FPS
1440p
low	226 FPS	270 FPS
medium	194 FPS	233 FPS
high	156 FPS	175 FPS
ultra	136 FPS	154 FPS
4K
low	151 FPS	183 FPS
medium	129 FPS	157 FPS
high	100 FPS	118 FPS
ultra	87 FPS	106 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 265HX Open Xeon w7-3445

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core Ultra 7 265HX	Xeon w7-3445
1080p
low	696 FPS	677 FPS
medium	595 FPS	587 FPS
high	499 FPS	477 FPS
ultra	450 FPS	423 FPS
1440p
low	607 FPS	547 FPS
medium	540 FPS	484 FPS
high	453 FPS	411 FPS
ultra	385 FPS	338 FPS
4K
low	357 FPS	322 FPS
medium	325 FPS	285 FPS
high	305 FPS	264 FPS
ultra	266 FPS	232 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 265HX Open Xeon w7-3445

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core Ultra 7 265HX	Xeon w7-3445
1080p
low	839 FPS	1025 FPS
medium	685 FPS	1045 FPS
high	610 FPS	967 FPS
ultra	522 FPS	829 FPS
1440p
low	727 FPS	994 FPS
medium	596 FPS	880 FPS
high	519 FPS	798 FPS
ultra	441 FPS	656 FPS
4K
low	515 FPS	593 FPS
medium	434 FPS	511 FPS
high	394 FPS	458 FPS
ultra	336 FPS	395 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 265HX Open Xeon w7-3445

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core Ultra 7 265HX	Xeon w7-3445
1080p
low	998 FPS	1225 FPS
medium	903 FPS	1015 FPS
high	784 FPS	981 FPS
ultra	712 FPS	851 FPS
1440p
low	817 FPS	1044 FPS
medium	726 FPS	903 FPS
high	628 FPS	779 FPS
ultra	558 FPS	656 FPS
4K
low	557 FPS	777 FPS
medium	503 FPS	676 FPS
high	451 FPS	583 FPS
ultra	398 FPS	437 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 265HX Open Xeon w7-3445

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core Ultra 7 265HX and Xeon w7-3445

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 w7-3445

The Xeon w7-3445 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 February 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) architecture. It features 20 cores and 40 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 52.5 MB. L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4677. Thermal design power (TDP): 270 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-4800. Passmark benchmark score: 48,991 points. Launch price was $1,989.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 7 265HX packs 20 cores / 20 threads, matching the Xeon w7-3445's 20 cores. Boost clocks reach 5.3 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 265HX versus 4.8 GHz on the Xeon w7-3445 — a 9.9% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 7 265HX (base: 2.6 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The Core Ultra 7 265HX uses the Arrow Lake-HX (2025) architecture (3 nm), while the Xeon w7-3445 uses Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024) (Intel 7 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 7 265HX scores 48,975 against the Xeon w7-3445's 48,991 — a 0% lead for the Xeon w7-3445. L3 cache: 30 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 7 265HX vs 52.5 MB on the Xeon w7-3445.

Feature	Core Ultra 7 265HX	Xeon w7-3445
Cores / Threads	20 / 20	20 / 40
Boost Clock	5.3 GHz+10%	4.8 GHz
Base Clock	2.6 GHz	2.6 GHz
L3 Cache	30 MB (total)	52.5 MB+75%
L2 Cache	3 MB (per core)+50%	2 MB (per core)
Process	3 nm-57%	Intel 7 nm
Architecture	Arrow Lake-HX (2025)	Sapphire Rapids (2023−2024)
PassMark	48,975	48,991
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 w7-3445 uses LGA4677 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6400 on the Core Ultra 7 265HX versus 4800 on the Xeon w7-3445 — the Xeon w7-3445 supports 199.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon w7-3445 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 w7-3445). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core Ultra 7 265HX) vs 112 (Xeon w7-3445) — the Xeon w7-3445 offers 92 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: WM880,HM870 (Core Ultra 7 265HX) and W790 (Xeon w7-3445).

Feature	Core Ultra 7 265HX	Xeon w7-3445
Socket	FCBGA2114	LGA4677
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6400	4800+95900%
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB+4915100%	4096
RAM Channels	2	8+300%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	112+460%

🔧

Advanced Features

Both processors feature an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. 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 w7-3445 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Xeon w7-3445 rivals Threadripper PRO 7965WX.

Feature	Core Ultra 7 265HX	Xeon w7-3445
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU	None
Unlocked	Yes	Yes
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 w7-3445 debuted at $1989. On MSRP ($450 vs $1989), the Core Ultra 7 265HX is $1539 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core Ultra 7 265HX delivers 108.8 pts/$ vs 24.6 pts/$ for the Xeon w7-3445 — making the Core Ultra 7 265HX the 126.2% better value option.