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.

Processor U300

2023

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,359 less on MSRP ($193 MSRP vs $1,552 MSRP).
✅Delivers 703.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 46.1 vs 5.7 PassMark/$ ($193 MSRP vs $1,552 MSRP).
✅Draws 15W instead of 115W, a 100W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA1744 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011 and older memory support.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-2670 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (8,897 vs 8,901).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 20 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2670, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.

Xeon E5-2670

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +16.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+150% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 0.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 5.7 vs 46.1 PassMark/$ ($1,552 MSRP vs $193 MSRP).
❌666.7% higher power demand at 115W vs 15W.
❌Older platform position on LGA2011, while Processor U300 moves to FCBGA1744 and DDR5.

Processor U300

2023

Xeon E5-2670

2012

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,359 less on MSRP ($193 MSRP vs $1,552 MSRP).
✅Delivers 703.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 46.1 vs 5.7 PassMark/$ ($193 MSRP vs $1,552 MSRP).
✅Draws 15W instead of 115W, a 100W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA1744 with DDR5 support instead of LGA2011 and older memory support.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +16.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+150% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads, plus 40 PCIe lanes vs 0.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (40 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon E5-2670 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (8,897 vs 8,901).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 20 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5-2670, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 40 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 5.7 vs 46.1 PassMark/$ ($1,552 MSRP vs $193 MSRP).
❌666.7% higher power demand at 115W vs 15W.
❌Older platform position on LGA2011, while Processor U300 moves to FCBGA1744 and DDR5.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon E5-2670 better than Processor U300?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon E5-2670 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Processor U300 is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Xeon E5-2670 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 16.5% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon E5-2670 is the better fit. You are getting 0% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 150% larger total L3 cache (20 MB vs 8 MB).

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

Xeon E5-2670 is the smarter buy by a wide margin for any fresh desktop build. Xeon E5-2670 is 704.1% more expensive on MSRP at $1,552 MSRP versus $193 MSRP, and it gives you a 16.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Processor U300 only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop CPU, not because it is a serious desktop gaming option. It simply cannot keep up with modern games, especially when the gap is already 16.5% in the shared gaming data.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Processor U300 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2023 vs 2012) and a healthier platform with FCBGA1744 and DDR5 instead of LGA2011. 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.

Processor U300 Benchmark Check

Xeon E5-2670 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Processor U300	Xeon E5-2670
1080p
low	183 FPS	157 FPS
medium	150 FPS	138 FPS
high	122 FPS	109 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	90 FPS
1440p
low	150 FPS	133 FPS
medium	118 FPS	113 FPS
high	96 FPS	88 FPS
ultra	78 FPS	72 FPS
4K
low	84 FPS	62 FPS
medium	72 FPS	56 FPS
high	57 FPS	43 FPS
ultra	45 FPS	34 FPS

Open Processor U300 Open Xeon E5-2670

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Processor U300	Xeon E5-2670
1080p
low	166 FPS	223 FPS
medium	137 FPS	223 FPS
high	126 FPS	223 FPS
ultra	110 FPS	206 FPS
1440p
low	146 FPS	223 FPS
medium	123 FPS	223 FPS
high	115 FPS	219 FPS
ultra	99 FPS	179 FPS
4K
low	113 FPS	179 FPS
medium	98 FPS	163 FPS
high	85 FPS	141 FPS
ultra	72 FPS	112 FPS

Open Processor U300 Open Xeon E5-2670

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Processor U300	Xeon E5-2670
1080p
low	222 FPS	223 FPS
medium	222 FPS	223 FPS
high	222 FPS	223 FPS
ultra	222 FPS	223 FPS
1440p
low	222 FPS	223 FPS
medium	222 FPS	223 FPS
high	222 FPS	223 FPS
ultra	222 FPS	223 FPS
4K
low	222 FPS	223 FPS
medium	222 FPS	223 FPS
high	206 FPS	223 FPS
ultra	163 FPS	223 FPS

Open Processor U300 Open Xeon E5-2670

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Processor U300	Xeon E5-2670
1080p
low	222 FPS	223 FPS
medium	222 FPS	223 FPS
high	222 FPS	223 FPS
ultra	222 FPS	223 FPS
1440p
low	222 FPS	223 FPS
medium	222 FPS	223 FPS
high	222 FPS	223 FPS
ultra	222 FPS	223 FPS
4K
low	222 FPS	223 FPS
medium	222 FPS	223 FPS
high	222 FPS	223 FPS
ultra	222 FPS	223 FPS

Open Processor U300 Open Xeon E5-2670

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Processor U300 and Xeon E5-2670

Processor U300

The Processor U300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 January 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-U (2023) architecture. It features 5 cores and 6 threads. Base frequency is 1.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1744. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 8,897 points. Launch price was $193.

Xeon E5-2670

The Xeon E5-2670 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 6 March 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge-EP (2012) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 20480 kB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA2011. Thermal design power (TDP): 115 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 8,901 points. Launch price was $145.

⚡

Processing Power

The Processor U300 packs 5 cores / 6 threads, while the Xeon E5-2670 offers 8 cores / 16 threads — the Xeon E5-2670 has 3 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.4 GHz on the Processor U300 versus 3.3 GHz on the Xeon E5-2670 — a 28.6% clock advantage for the Processor U300 (base: 1.2 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The Processor U300 uses the Raptor Lake-U (2023) architecture (10 nm), while the Xeon E5-2670 uses Sandy Bridge-EP (2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Processor U300 scores 8,897 against the Xeon E5-2670's 8,901 — a 0% lead for the Xeon E5-2670. L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Processor U300 vs 20480 kB (total) on the Xeon E5-2670.

Feature	Processor U300	Xeon E5-2670
Cores / Threads	5 / 6	8 / 16+60%
Boost Clock	4.4 GHz+33%	3.3 GHz
Base Clock	1.2 GHz	2.6 GHz+117%
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	20480 kB (total)+150%
L2 Cache	1.25 MB (per core)+400%	256 kB (per core)
Process	10 nm-69%	32 nm
Architecture	Raptor Lake-U (2023)	Sandy Bridge-EP (2012)
PassMark	8,897	8,901

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Processor U300 uses the FCBGA1744 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon E5-2670 uses LGA2011 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Processor U300	Xeon E5-2670
Socket	FCBGA1744	LGA2011
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+150%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR3-1600
Max RAM Capacity	—	384 GB
RAM Channels	—	4
ECC Support	—	Yes
PCIe Lanes	—	40

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Processor U300) / VT-x, VT-d (Xeon E5-2670). Primary use case: Xeon E5-2670 targets Server.

Feature	Processor U300	Xeon E5-2670
Integrated GPU	—	No
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	—	Server

💰

Value Analysis

The Processor U300 launched at $193 MSRP, while the Xeon E5-2670 debuted at $1552. On MSRP ($193 vs $1552), the Processor U300 is $1359 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Processor U300 delivers 46.1 pts/$ vs 5.7 pts/$ for the Xeon E5-2670 — making the Processor U300 the 155.7% better value option.