Intel Core i3-10100 vs Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits these two processors cleanly along a single-thread versus multi-thread axis. The Intel Core i3-10100 claims exactly one head-to-head victory: Cinebench R15 single-core, where it scores 88 against the Xeon's 84, a 4.8% advantage. That is the only benchmark in the entire comparison where the Core i3 comes out ahead.

Every other recorded test belongs to the Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3. The Xeon wins all three multi-core Cinebench runs (R15, R20, and R23) and also takes the R20 single-core and R23 single-core tests. The multi-core deltas are uniform at -56.6% from the perspective of the Core i3, meaning the Xeon's scores are more than double in each case. The single-core R20 result (350 vs 152) and R23 result (834 vs 362) show the same -56.6% gap, which is striking because the Core i3 wins the R15 single-core test yet loses the newer single-core workloads by the same margin as the multi-core tests.

This pattern suggests the Xeon E5-1620 v3 is the stronger overall compute part in the database, but the Core i3-10100 retains a narrow edge in the older single-thread workload. For modern threaded applications, the Xeon's performance class is clearly higher. For legacy single-thread tasks, the Core i3's 4.8% margin is modest but real.

The average benchmark scores tell a similar story. The Core i3-10100 sits at 1742, while the Xeon E5-1620 v3 averages 1709. That puts the Core i3 slightly ahead on average, but the gap is only 1.9% and falls within the range of their nearest rivals. The Core i3's nearest rival, AMD Ryzen 3 4300U, matches its 1742 exactly with a 0% delta. The Xeon's closest competitor, Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4, also matches its 1709 exactly. Both processors occupy the same percentile tier: 41st for the Core i3 and 40th for the Xeon against all CPUs in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different Intel eras and design philosophies. The Core i3-10100 uses Comet Lake architecture on a 14 nm process, built by Intel. It is a desktop part with 4 cores and 8 threads, base clock of 3.60 GHz and boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The Xeon E5-1620 v3 uses Haswell-EP architecture on a 22 nm process, also by Intel, and targets the server/workstation segment. It has the same 4 cores and 8 threads but runs at 3.50 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost, so the Core i3 has higher clocks on both ends.

The Xeon compensates with a much larger L3 cache: 10 MB shared versus 6 MB shared for the Core i3. Both have identical per-core L1 and L2 caches at 64 KB and 256 KB respectively. The Xeon also reports transistor count and die size: 2,600 million transistors on a 356 mm² die. The Core i3 does not have those figures recorded in the database.

Memory support diverges significantly. Both support DDR4, but the Core i3 uses a dual-channel bus with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth, while the Xeon uses a quad-channel bus with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth. The Xeon also supports ECC memory; the Core i3 does not. PCIe lanes differ as well: the Core i3 provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Xeon provides Gen 3 with 40 lanes.

The integrated graphics situation is one-sided. The Core i3 includes UHD Graphics 630, while the Xeon has no integrated graphics at all. The Core i3 uses Intel Socket 1200, and the Xeon uses Intel Socket 2011-3. The Core i3 is listed as Active in production, released on 2020-04-29. The Xeon is End-of-life, released on 2014-09-07. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher clock speeds?

A: The Intel Core i3-10100 runs at 3.60 GHz base and 4.30 GHz boost. The Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 runs at 3.50 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost. The Core i3 is ahead on both figures.

Q: Does the Xeon support ECC memory?

A: Yes. The Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 has ECC memory support and uses a quad-channel DDR4 bus with 68.3 GB/s bandwidth. The Core i3-10100 lacks ECC support and uses dual-channel DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which chip has the larger cache?

A: The Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 has 10 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core i3-10100 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache. Both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core.

Q: What is the production status of each processor?

A: The Intel Core i3-10100 is listed as Active in production. The Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 is listed as End-of-life.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i3-10100 includes integrated graphics, specifically UHD Graphics 630. The Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 has no integrated graphics.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core i3-10100 averages 1742 across all recorded benchmarks. The Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 averages 1709. The Core i3 holds a 1.9% advantage, which aligns with its slightly higher percentile rank of 41 versus 40.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two processors differ in the database.

| Field | Intel Core i3-10100 | Intel Xeon E5-1620 v3 |

| --- | --- | --- |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 3.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.30 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 140 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1200 | Intel Socket 2011-3 |

| Architecture | Comet Lake | Haswell |

| Codename | Comet Lake | Haswell-EP |

| Generation | Core i3 (Comet Lake) | Xeon E5 (Haswell-EP) |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 22 nm |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 2,600 million |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 356 mm² |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 10 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 42.7 GB/s | 68.3 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | false | true |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3, 40 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 630 | null |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2020-04-29 | 2014-09-07 |

| Part Number | SRH3N | QGZYSR20P |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are dominated by the Xeon E5-1620 v3, which wins five of the six recorded tests. The single Core i3 victory is narrow, and the Xeon victories are consistently large.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 595 against the Core i3's 258. That is a 56.6% deficit for the Core i3, meaning the Xeon delivers roughly 2.3 times the multi-threaded performance in this workload. The R15 single-core test flips the result: the Core i3 scores 88 versus 84, a 4.8% margin. This is the only test where the Core i3 leads.

Cinebench R20 shows the Xeon's dominance expanding. In multi-core, the Xeon records 2482 against 1076, again a -56.6% delta for the Core i3. In single-core, the Xeon takes a 350 to 152 victory, the same -56.6% delta. This is notable because the Core i3 won the R15 single-core test but loses the R20 single-core test by the same margin as the multi-core tests.

Cinebench R23 continues the pattern. The Xeon scores 5910 in multi-core versus 2564 for the Core i3, a -56.6% delta. In single-core, the Xeon scores 834 versus 362, again -56.6%. Across all four R20 and R23 tests, the delta is identical at -56.6%, suggesting a consistent performance ratio between these two chips in newer Cinebench versions.

The overall win count is 5 for the Xeon and 1 for the Core i3. The average benchmark scores, however, tell a slightly different story: 1742 for the Core i3 and 1709 for the Xeon. This discrepancy arises because the average includes only the benchmarks recorded for each processor individually, and the Core i3 has additional 3DMark and Geekbench entries that are not present in the Xeon's record. The Xeon's benchmark list contains only six Cinebench tests, while the Core i3 includes fourteen tests across 3DMark, Cinebench, and Geekbench.

The percentile ranks are close: 41st for the Core i3 and 40th for the Xeon. Their nearest rivals also overlap in performance class. The Core i3's closest competitor, AMD Ryzen 3 4300U, matches its 1742 average exactly. The Xeon's closest competitor, Intel Xeon E3-1265L v4, matches its 1709 exactly. Both chips sit within 0.4% of a cluster of rivals including Intel Core i5-6600, Intel Core i3-1315UE, Intel Core i7-980X, Intel Core i7-990X, AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 2700U, and Intel Core i7-4910MQ.

In practical terms, the database shows a clear trade-off. The Core i3-10100 offers higher clocks, a newer process node, integrated graphics, and a much lower TDP of 65 W versus 140 W. The Xeon E5-1620 v3 offers a larger cache, quad-channel memory with ECC support, more PCIe lanes, and substantially higher multi-threaded Cinebench scores. For workloads that scale across cores, the Xeon is the clear choice. For single-thread legacy tasks, the Core i3 holds a slim edge. The Xeon's end-of-life status and the Core i3's active production status further differentiate their positions in the market, but the recorded performance data places them in the same overall percentile tier among all CPUs.