CPU Comparison

The Intel Core i3-10325 and Intel Xeon E-2144G are both 4-core, 8-thread Intel parts, but they target different corners of the market. The i3-10325 is a Comet Lake desktop chip with a higher clock speed, while the Xeon E-2144G is a Coffee Lake workstation processor with ECC memory support. Benchmark data from Cinebench shows the i3-10325 winning every single head-to-head test, but the Xeon’s feature set tells a different story for specific workloads. The i3-10325 posts an average benchmark score of 2530 against the Xeon’s 2514, a 0.7% delta in favor of the Core part, placing both at the 49th percentile among all CPUs.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-10325 wins outright on raw computational throughput in every benchmark recorded. Across six Cinebench tests, R15, R20, and R23, each in single-core and multi-core variants, the i3-10325 takes the win with deltas ranging from 10.5% to 10.7%. This is a clean sweep, with the largest margins appearing in single-core tests, where the i3-10325’s higher boost clock drives a 10.7% advantage in both R15 and R20 single-core. Multi-core scores also favor the i3-10325 by 10.5% to 10.6%, showing that the clock speed advantage scales across all threads, not just one.

The Intel Xeon E-2144G wins where the benchmark data doesn’t cover: memory reliability and platform features. It is the only one of the two with ECC memory support, which is a critical feature for server or workstation environments where data integrity matters more than raw speed. The Xeon also carries a die size of 126 mm², a detail absent for the i3-10325, though this does not translate into a performance advantage in the tested workloads. For users who need error-correcting memory, the Xeon is the only viable choice here, even though it trails in every Cinebench score.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel’s 14 nm process node, but they come from different architectural families. The i3-10325 uses the Comet Lake architecture, specifically the Comet Lake-R codename, and belongs to the Core 10th Gen series. The Xeon E-2144G uses the Coffee Lake architecture, with the codename Coffee Lake-S WS, and is part of the Xeon E-2100 series. This architectural split explains the platform differences: the i3-10325 fits Intel Socket 1200, while the Xeon E-2144G uses Intel Socket 1151.

Cache configurations are identical on paper. Both chips have 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The memory controllers are also the same in terms of bandwidth, with both supporting dual-channel DDR4 at 42.7 GB/s. The PCIe support matches as well, with both offering Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The key architectural divergence is the integrated graphics: the i3-10325 sports UHD Graphics 630, while the Xeon E-2144G uses HD Graphics P630. Both have the same 4-core, 8-thread configuration, but the i3-10325’s base clock of 3.90 GHz and boost clock of 4.70 GHz outpace the Xeon’s 3.60 GHz base and 4.50 GHz boost.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench R15 multicore test sets the tone: the i3-10325 scores 881 against the Xeon’s 797, a 10.5% lead. The single-core R15 test shows an even larger gap, with the i3-10325 at 124 and the Xeon at 112, a 10.7% margin. Moving to Cinebench R20, the i3-10325 posts 3673 multicore and 518 single-core, while the Xeon manages 3322 and 468 respectively, again a 10.6% and 10.7% delta. The pattern holds in Cinebench R23, where the i3-10325 scores 8747 multicore and 1234 single-core, against the Xeon’s 7910 and 1116, both 10.6% gaps.

The consistency of these results is notable. Every single benchmark shows the i3-10325 ahead by roughly 10.5% to 10.7%, regardless of the workload type. This suggests the performance difference is purely clock-driven, as the architecture and cache are otherwise identical. The Xeon E-2144G does have additional Geekbench scores in its data, 4875 multicore and 1508 single-core, but there is no corresponding Geekbench result for the i3-10325 in the pack, so no direct comparison can be made on that test. The Xeon’s average benchmark score of 2514 places it 0.6% behind the i3-10325’s 2530, and the nearest rivals list confirms the two chips are within a hair of each other overall.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core i3-10325 wins all multi-core Cinebench tests. It scores 881 in R15 multicore against the Xeon’s 797, 3673 versus 3322 in R20 multicore, and 8747 versus 7910 in R23 multicore. That’s a consistent 10.5% to 10.6% lead.

Q: Does the Xeon E-2144G offer any advantage over the i3-10325?

A: Yes, the Xeon E-2144G supports ECC memory, which the i3-10325 does not. This makes the Xeon the only option for systems requiring error-correcting memory. The Xeon also has a documented die size of 126 mm², though this does not affect benchmark performance.

Q: How do the clock speeds compare?

A: The i3-10325 has a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The Xeon E-2144G is slower on both counts, with a 3.60 GHz base and 4.50 GHz boost. The i3-10325’s higher clocks explain its consistent benchmark wins.

Q: Are the cache and memory specifications the same?

A: Yes, both processors feature 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. Both support dual-channel DDR4 memory with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth, and both have PCIe Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The i3-10325 has an average benchmark score of 2530, while the Xeon E-2144G scores 2514. This gives the i3-10325 a 0.7% advantage. The nearest rival data shows the i3-10325 is 0.6% ahead of the Xeon E-2244G and 0.8% ahead of the Xeon E5-2643 v3.

Q: Which processor has a higher launch MSRP?

A: The Xeon E-2144G has a launch MSRP of $272, while the i3-10325 has a launch MSRP of $154. The i3-10325 is also listed as Active in production, whereas the Xeon E-2144G is marked as End-of-life.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i3-10325 | Intel Xeon E-2144G |

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

| Series | Core 10th Gen | Xeon E-2100 series |

| Architecture | Comet Lake | Coffee Lake |

| Codename | Comet Lake-R | Coffee Lake-S WS |

| Generation | Core i3 (Comet Lake) | Xeon E (Coffee Lake) |

| Base Clock | 3.90 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.70 GHz | 4.50 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 71 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1200 | Intel Socket 1151 |

| Die Size | Not specified | 126 mm² |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 630 | HD Graphics P630 |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Server/Workstation |

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

| Release Date | 2021-03-15 | 2018-07-11 |

| Launch MSRP | $154 | $272 |

| Part Number | SRH3H | SR3WM |

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance winner: the Intel Core i3-10325 beats the Xeon E-2144G in every single benchmark recorded, with margins between 10.5% and 10.7%. If raw Cinebench scores are the only metric, the i3-10325 is the obvious pick. It is faster in both single-core and multi-core workloads, has a higher base and boost clock, and comes with a lower TDP of 65 W versus the Xeon’s 71 W. It is also the newer part, released in 2021 versus 2018, and remains Active in production while the Xeon is End-of-life. The i3-10325’s launch MSRP of $154 is also notably lower than the Xeon’s $272.

However, the Xeon E-2144G is not without purpose. Its ECC memory support is the single feature that the i3-10325 cannot match, and that alone justifies its existence for server or workstation builds where memory corruption is unacceptable. The Xeon targets the Server/Workstation market segment, while the i3-10325 is aimed at Desktop. For users building a system that must run ECC memory, the Xeon’s 0.7% average score deficit becomes irrelevant. For anyone else, the i3-10325 offers better performance across the board, a newer platform with Socket 1200, and a lower launch MSRP. The verdict is straightforward: choose the i3-10325 for speed and efficiency, choose the Xeon E-2144G only if ECC memory is a hard requirement.