M2
Popular choices:
Xeon E5-4610 v4
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.
M2
2022Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +3.6% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 20W instead of 105W, a 85W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on none with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (14,933 vs 15,084).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-4610 v4, which brings 10 cores / 20 threads.
Xeon E5-4610 v4
2016Why buy it
- ✅+1% higher PassMark.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 10 cores / 20 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than M2 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌425% higher power demand at 105W vs 20W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA2011 with DDR4, while M2 moves to none and DDR5.
M2
2022Xeon E5-4610 v4
2016Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +3.6% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 20W instead of 105W, a 85W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on none with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011 and DDR4.
Why buy it
- ✅+1% higher PassMark.
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 10 cores / 20 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (14,933 vs 15,084).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-4610 v4, which brings 10 cores / 20 threads.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than M2 across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌425% higher power demand at 105W vs 20W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA2011 with DDR4, while M2 moves to none and DDR5.
Quick Answers
So, is M2 better than Xeon E5-4610 v4?
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 | M2 | Xeon E5-4610 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 175 FPS | 158 FPS |
| medium | 140 FPS | 137 FPS |
| high | 113 FPS | 111 FPS |
| ultra | 90 FPS | 91 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 141 FPS | 133 FPS |
| medium | 111 FPS | 112 FPS |
| high | 88 FPS | 88 FPS |
| ultra | 69 FPS | 72 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 66 FPS | 62 FPS |
| medium | 55 FPS | 56 FPS |
| high | 44 FPS | 44 FPS |
| ultra | 35 FPS | 34 FPS |
Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | M2 | Xeon E5-4610 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 288 FPS | 188 FPS |
| medium | 246 FPS | 170 FPS |
| high | 213 FPS | 148 FPS |
| ultra | 166 FPS | 122 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 248 FPS | 162 FPS |
| medium | 220 FPS | 149 FPS |
| high | 193 FPS | 131 FPS |
| ultra | 150 FPS | 107 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 174 FPS | 106 FPS |
| medium | 159 FPS | 98 FPS |
| high | 136 FPS | 87 FPS |
| ultra | 106 FPS | 69 FPS |
League of Legends
| Preset | M2 | Xeon E5-4610 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 373 FPS | 377 FPS |
| medium | 373 FPS | 377 FPS |
| high | 373 FPS | 377 FPS |
| ultra | 373 FPS | 377 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 373 FPS | 377 FPS |
| medium | 373 FPS | 377 FPS |
| high | 373 FPS | 377 FPS |
| ultra | 363 FPS | 377 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 373 FPS | 377 FPS |
| medium | 314 FPS | 372 FPS |
| high | 277 FPS | 338 FPS |
| ultra | 221 FPS | 279 FPS |
Valorant
| Preset | M2 | Xeon E5-4610 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 373 FPS | 377 FPS |
| medium | 373 FPS | 377 FPS |
| high | 373 FPS | 377 FPS |
| ultra | 373 FPS | 377 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 373 FPS | 377 FPS |
| medium | 373 FPS | 377 FPS |
| high | 373 FPS | 377 FPS |
| ultra | 373 FPS | 377 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 373 FPS | 377 FPS |
| medium | 373 FPS | 377 FPS |
| high | 373 FPS | 350 FPS |
| ultra | 328 FPS | 301 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of M2 and Xeon E5-4610 v4
M2
M2
The M2 is manufactured by Apple. It was released in 10 June 2022 (3 years ago). It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.424 GHz, with boost up to 3.48 GHz. L2 cache: 20 MB. Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: none. Thermal design power (TDP): 20 Watt. Memory support: LPDDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 14,933 points. Launch price was $149.
Xeon E5-4610 v4
Xeon E5-4610 v4
The Xeon E5-4610 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 10 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 25 MB. L2 cache: 2.5 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 15,084 points. Launch price was $1,219.
Processing Power
The M2 packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon E5-4610 v4 offers 10 cores / 20 threads — the Xeon E5-4610 v4 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.48 GHz on the M2 versus 1.8 GHz on the Xeon E5-4610 v4 — a 63.6% clock advantage for the M2 (base: 2.424 GHz vs 1.8 GHz). The Xeon E5-4610 v4 is built on the Broadwell (2015−2019) architecture. In PassMark, the M2 scores 14,933 against the Xeon E5-4610 v4's 15,084 — a 1% lead for the Xeon E5-4610 v4.
| Feature | M2 | Xeon E5-4610 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 8 / 8 | 10 / 20+25% |
| Boost Clock | 3.48 GHz+93% | 1.8 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.424 GHz+35% | 1.8 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 25 MB |
| L2 Cache | 20 MB+700% | 2.5 MB |
| Process | 5 nm-64% | 14 nm |
| Architecture | — | Broadwell (2015−2019) |
| PassMark | 14,933 | 15,084+1% |
Memory & Platform
The M2 uses the none socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Xeon E5-4610 v4 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | M2 | Xeon E5-4610 v4 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | none | LGA2011 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 4.0+33% | PCIe 3.0 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on M2 and Xeon E5-4610 v4
