CPU Comparison

The Intel Xeon W3540 and Intel Core i3-10110Y are separated by a decade of design philosophy, yet their benchmark results are remarkably close. The Xeon W3540 is a 45 nm server part from 2009, while the i3-10110Y is a 14 nm mobile chip from 2019. Despite these differences, the data shows a near-tie in raw compute performance, with the older Xeon eking out marginal wins across every tested workload. This comparison is less about which is faster and more about what each platform represents in terms of power, features, and intended use.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are almost startlingly consistent. The Xeon W3540 wins all five tested Cinebench workloads, but the margins are razor-thin. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 267 against the i3’s 265, a delta of just 0.8%. That is the largest percentage gap in the entire head-to-head, and it is still within the noise of any real-world testing. The pattern holds in Cinebench R20 multi-core: Xeon 1113 versus i3 1108, a 0.5% difference. Single-core results are equally tight. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Xeon posts 157 while the i3 manages 156, a 0.6% win. Cinebench R23 mirrors this, with the Xeon taking multi-core 2652 to 2640 and single-core 374 to 372, both by 0.5%.

What does this mean in practice? For a user, the difference between 267 and 265 points in R15 is imperceptible. The data suggests that a four-core, eight-thread Nehalem part from 2009 and a two-core, four-thread Comet Lake part from 2019 deliver effectively identical rendering performance. The i3’s higher boost clock, 4.00 GHz versus 3.20 GHz, might be expected to give it an edge in single-threaded tasks, but the Xeon’s additional two physical cores compensate in multi-threaded tests, and its slightly higher base architecture efficiency keeps it ahead even in single-core runs.

Looking at the broader context, both CPUs sit at the 24th percentile of all CPUs, meaning three-quarters of processors in the database outperform them. Their average benchmark scores are 913 for the Xeon and 908 for the i3, a 0.5% difference. The nearest rivals for the Xeon include the AMD Ryzen 3 3250U (avg 908, delta 0.5%) and the AMD Athlon Silver 3050U (avg 917, delta -0.5%). The i3’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-4330T (avg 908, delta 0%) and the same AMD Ryzen 3 3250U (avg 908, delta 0%). This places both chips in the same performance bracket as entry-level AMD mobile parts, which is a notable context for the Xeon, a server-class component from a different era.

The Verdict

The data does not support a clear performance winner. The Xeon W3540 wins every benchmark, but by margins between 0.5% and 0.8%, which is effectively a statistical tie. The real decision comes down to platform fit. The Xeon W3540 is a server and workstation part on Intel Socket 1366, requiring a motherboard with that socket and a 130 W TDP cooling solution. The i3-10110Y is a mobile chip on Intel BGA 1440, soldered to the board, with a 9 W TDP. These are not interchangeable products.

Choose the Xeon W3540 if you have a legacy Socket 1366 workstation or server board and need a drop-in upgrade that maintains ECC memory support. The data shows it is still competitive with modern low-end mobile parts, so it is not useless. Choose the i3-10110Y if you are building or buying a low-power, fanless or lightly-cooled mobile system. The 9 W TDP versus 130 W TDP is the single most important differentiator. The i3 also includes integrated UHD Graphics, which the Xeon lacks entirely. For a system that must run without a discrete GPU, the i3 is the only viable option.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras and design goals. The Xeon W3540 uses the Nehalem architecture, codename Bloomfield, built on a 45 nm process at Intel’s own foundry. It packs 731 million transistors on a 263 mm² die. The i3-10110Y uses the Comet Lake architecture, specifically Comet Lake-Y, built on a 14 nm process, also at Intel’s foundry. The Xeon has four cores and eight threads; the i3 has two cores and four threads. The Xeon’s cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, with a large 8 MB shared L3. The i3 matches the L1 and L2 per-core sizes, but its L3 is halved to 4 MB shared.

Memory support differs significantly. The Xeon supports DDR3 memory in a triple-channel configuration and has ECC memory support, a hallmark of server-class parts. The i3 also supports DDR3, but the fact pack lists no memory bus width, and it lacks ECC support. The Xeon uses PCIe Gen 2, while the i3’s PCIe generation is not listed. The Xeon has no integrated graphics; the i3 includes UHD Graphics. The Xeon’s production status is end-of-life, while the i3 is active. The Xeon’s release date is March 2009; the i3’s is August 2019. Neither CPU has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Xeon W3540 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core i3-10110Y has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What is the performance difference in multi-core workloads?

A: The Xeon W3540 wins all multi-core tests. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, it scores 1113 versus 1108 for the i3, a 0.5% difference. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 2652 versus 2640, also 0.5%.

Q: Does either CPU have integrated graphics?

A: No, the Xeon W3540 does not have integrated graphics. The i3-10110Y includes Intel UHD Graphics.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: The Xeon W3540 supports ECC memory. The i3-10110Y does not support ECC memory.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The Xeon W3540 has a thermal design power (TDP) of 130 W. The i3-10110Y has a TDP of just 9 W.

Q: Are these CPUs comparable in average benchmark score?

A: Yes. The Xeon W3540 has an average benchmark score of 913, and the i3-10110Y has an average score of 908. Both sit at the 24th percentile of all CPUs.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon W3540 wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, but the margins are so small that the victory is academic. Where the Xeon genuinely wins is in server-relevant features. It supports ECC memory, which is critical for error-correcting workloads like file servers or database hosts. It uses a triple-channel memory bus, which can provide more memory bandwidth for multi-threaded tasks. Its socket, Intel Socket 1366, is associated with workstation boards that offer more expansion slots and higher memory capacities. The Xeon’s 8 MB of L3 cache is double the i3’s 4 MB, which can help in data-heavy applications.

The i3-10110Y wins decisively on power efficiency. A 9 W TDP versus 130 W is not a small difference; it is a factor of over 14. This makes the i3 suitable for fanless notebooks, tablets, or ultra-portable designs where heat and battery life are paramount. The i3 also has integrated UHD Graphics, eliminating the need for a separate GPU in basic systems. Its 4.00 GHz boost clock is substantially higher than the Xeon’s 3.20 GHz, which could improve responsiveness in lightly-threaded, bursty workloads despite the benchmark ties. The i3’s BGA 1440 socket is soldered, which is a downside for upgradability but a plus for compact device designs.

Specification Differences

The most glaring difference is TDP: the Xeon W3540 draws 130 W, while the i3-10110Y draws only 9 W. The Xeon has 4 cores and 8 threads; the i3 has 2 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks are listed as 2.93 GHz for the Xeon and 1000.00 MHz (1.00 GHz) for the i3, though the i3’s boost clock of 4.00 GHz far exceeds the Xeon’s 3.20 GHz. The Xeon uses a 45 nm process with 731 million transistors on a 263 mm² die; the i3 uses a 14 nm process with no listed transistor or die size. L3 cache is 8 MB on the Xeon versus 4 MB on the i3. The Xeon supports triple-channel DDR3 and ECC memory; the i3 supports DDR3 but with no listed memory bus and no ECC. The Xeon uses PCIe Gen 2; the i3’s PCIe is not specified. The Xeon has no integrated graphics; the i3 has UHD Graphics. Sockets differ: Intel Socket 1366 for the Xeon, Intel BGA 1440 for the i3. Market segments are server/workstation versus mobile. The Xeon is end-of-life and was released in March 2009; the i3 is active and was released in August 2019. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. The Xeon’s part number is SLBEX; the i3’s part number is not listed.