Intel Core i3-10105 vs Intel Xeon Gold 6348 Comparison

The Intel Xeon Gold 6348 and the Intel Core i3-10105 make for one of the most lopsided comparisons in the database, and the recorded data leaves no ambiguity about it. The Xeon Gold 6348 is a 28-core, 56-thread server processor built on Intel's 10 nm Ice Lake-SP architecture, while the Core i3-10105 is a 4-core, 8-thread desktop chip on the older 14 nm Comet Lake-R design. Both parts landed in the database within weeks of each other in 2021, both carry a 67th percentile ranking against all recorded CPUs, and both share an Intel foundry origin. Beyond those surface similarities, the benchmark record shows the Xeon sweeping every single head-to-head test, with margins exceeding 500 percent across the board. This page walks through where each chip wins, why the architecture gap is so large, and who should actually pick which.

Where Each One Wins

Strictly on wins, the comparison is one-directional: the Xeon Gold 6348 takes all six head-to-head benchmarks, and the Core i3-10105 takes none. In Cinebench R23 multi-core the Xeon posts 44,066 points against the i3's 7,029, a 526.9 percent gap. The single-core results are just as decisive, 6,221 versus 992 in R23, a 527.1 percent margin. Every Cinebench version in the database tells the same story, with deltas ranging from 526.9 to 532.3 percent.

The practical takeaway is that the Xeon wins every workload that scales across threads: rendering, simulation, batch processing, virtualization, and anything else a server-class platform is asked to absorb. Its 28 cores and 56 threads exist precisely for that class of task.

The i3-10105, by contrast, has no benchmark wins here, but it does have a domain where its design makes sense. Its recorded Passmark suite, which the Xeon entry lacks, shows a capable everyday desktop profile: 4,325 in Geekbench multi-core, 1,319 in Geekbench single-core, 8,241 in Passmark multithread, and 2,589 in Passmark single-thread. Those are the numbers of a mainstream desktop processor handling office applications, web workloads, and light content tasks. Its rival set reinforces that positioning: the database places it closest to the Intel Core i7-6700K (avgScore 12,237, 0.6 percent away), the AMD EPYC 9174F (12,536, -1.8 percent), the Intel Core i5-1230U (12,559, -1.9 percent), and the Intel Core i3-12100 (12,054, 2.2 percent away). The i3-10105 also integrates UHD Graphics 630, which the Xeon lacks entirely, so it wins by default in any scenario requiring integrated display output without a discrete GPU.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different worlds within Intel's lineup. The Xeon Gold 6348 is an Ice Lake-SP server processor fabricated on Intel's 10 nm node, socketed in the large Intel Socket 4189 and aimed at the Server/Workstation segment. The Core i3-10105 is a Comet Lake-R desktop processor on the mature 14 nm node, sitting in Intel Socket 1200 for the mainstream desktop market.

The core count gap is the defining difference: 28 cores and 56 threads for the Xeon against 4 cores and 8 threads for the i3. Clock speeds run in the opposite direction, as is typical when comparing server and desktop parts. The i3-10105 clocks higher, with a 3.70 base and 4.40 boost, while the Xeon runs a 2.60 base and 3.50 boost. Even so, the single-core Cinebench results favor the Xeon by more than 500 percent in the recorded data, a reflection of the architectural jump from Comet Lake to Ice Lake rather than raw frequency.

Cache tells a similar story of scale. The Xeon carries 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, plus a 42 MB shared L3. The i3 matches the 64 KB L1 per core but has only 256 KB of L2 per core and a 6 MB shared L3, one-seventh the L3 capacity of the Xeon.

Platform features diverge sharply. The Xeon supports DDR4 across an eight-channel memory bus with 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth and full ECC memory support. The i3 supports DDR4 on a dual-channel bus with 42.7 GB/s of bandwidth and no ECC. PCIe follows the same pattern: the Xeon offers Gen 4 with 64 CPU lanes, the i3 Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes. Thermal envelopes differ accordingly, with the Xeon rated at a 235 W TDP and the i3 at 65 W. Neither part has an unlocked multiplier. Both remain listed as Active in production terms, and both were released in 2021, the i3 on March 15 and the Xeon on April 5.

The Verdict

The data supports exactly one conclusion for compute-heavy buyers: the Xeon Gold 6348. It wins every recorded head-to-head benchmark, often by a factor of more than six, and it brings server-grade platform features, ECC memory, eight-channel DDR4, and 64 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, that the i3 cannot match. Workloads that scale across 56 threads will exploit the gap fully.

The Core i3-10105 is not a rival to this chip in any benchmark sense, and framing it as one would misread the data. Its role, according to its own recorded results and rival set, is mainstream desktop computing. It carries a launch MSRP of $122, includes integrated graphics, fits a mainstream desktop socket, and posts Passmark and Geekbench numbers consistent with everyday desktop use. Buyers building a basic desktop with display output and modest power draw have a fit here. Buyers with rendering, server, or workstation workloads have none. For reference, the Xeon's average benchmark score of 12,746 places it within a fraction of a percent of chips like the Intel Core i5-8400 (12,765, -0.2 percent), the AMD EPYC 7502 (12,709, 0.3 percent), the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X (12,786, -0.3 percent), and the Intel Core i3-1210U (12,795, -0.4 percent), while the i3's 12,316 average sits near the Intel Core i7-6700K and Intel Core i3-12100.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Core i3-10105 win any benchmark against the Xeon Gold 6348? A: No. The Xeon Gold 6348 wins all six head-to-head benchmarks, with margins between 526.9 and 532.3 percent.

Q: Which chip has the higher clock speeds? A: The Core i3-10105, with a 3.70 base and 4.40 boost clock. The Xeon Gold 6348 runs a 2.60 base and 3.50 boost. Despite the lower clocks, the Xeon leads in every recorded single-core test.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory? A: Only the Xeon Gold 6348 supports ECC. The Core i3-10105 does not.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics? A: The Core i3-10105 includes Intel UHD Graphics 630. The Xeon Gold 6348 has no integrated graphics listed in the database.

Q: How much more memory bandwidth does the Xeon provide? A: The Xeon Gold 6348 delivers 204.8 GB/s across an eight-channel DDR4 bus, while the Core i3-10105 delivers 42.7 GB/s across dual-channel DDR4.

Q: What is the difference in power rating? A: The Xeon Gold 6348 carries a 235 W TDP; the Core i3-10105 carries a 65 W TDP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head record is a clean sweep for the Xeon Gold 6348, and the margins are remarkably consistent, which itself is informative. Every delta sits in a narrow band between roughly 527 and 532 percent, meaning the Xeon's advantage holds steady whether the test stresses one core or all 28.

Start with the oldest suite in the record. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 4,441 against the i3's 708, a 527.3 percent win. R15 single-core goes to the Xeon 626 to 99, a 532.3 percent margin, the largest gap in the entire head-to-head set.

Cinebench R20 repeats the pattern. Multi-core finishes at 18,507 versus 2,952, a 526.9 percent advantage for the Xeon. Single-core lands at 2,612 versus 416, a 527.9 percent gap.

Cinebench R23, the most demanding render test in the comparison, produces the biggest absolute numbers. The Xeon records 44,066 in multi-core against the i3's 7,029, a 526.9 percent difference. Single-core R23 finishes 6,221 to 992, a 527.1 percent win. That consistency across renderers and thread counts indicates the Xeon's per-core Ice Lake advantage compounds with its thread-count advantage rather than trading off against it.

For additional context from each chip's own record, the i3-10105's broader suite shows where its performance actually lives: 8,241 in Passmark multithread, 2,589 in Passmark single-thread, 28,577 in integer math, 17,949 in floating point math, 128,464 in data compression, and 2,723 in data encryption. The Xeon's database entry does not include those tests, so the direct comparison rests on the Cinebench family, where the outcome is unambiguous: six tests, six Xeon wins, zero for the i3, and no benchmark in the record where the Core i3-10105 comes out ahead.