Intel Core i3-1115G4 vs Intel Xeon Gold 5317 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Xeon Gold 5317 dominates every recorded benchmark in this comparison. Across all six head-to-head tests, the Xeon Gold 5317 posts a winning margin of roughly 78.7% or 78.8% over the Core i3-1115G4. This is not a close contest: the server-class processor leads in both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads, and the margin is nearly identical across all Cinebench versions (R15, R20, and R23). The data shows a consistent performance gap of about four to five times the Core i3's scores in every test.

The Core i3-1115G4 has no benchmark wins in the head-to-head set. Its only comparative strength appears in the surrounding database context: it sits at the 63rd percentile among all CPUs, while the Xeon Gold 5317 sits at the 62nd percentile. That percentile ranking, however, reflects the Core i3's position among a broad mix of processors, including many lower-end mobile parts, whereas the Xeon Gold's percentile is computed against a field that includes other server and workstation chips. In practical terms, the Core i3's average benchmark score of 6851 is slightly higher than the Xeon Gold's 6710, but that average includes a wider range of tests (PassMark suites) that the Xeon Gold does not have recorded in this database.

The use-case split is clear. The Core i3-1115G4 is a mobile processor with integrated Iris Xe-LP Graphics G4, a 15 W TDP, and a dual-channel memory bus supporting DDR4 and LPDDR4X. It belongs in thin-and-light laptops where power draw and thermals are constrained. The Xeon Gold 5317 is a server/workstation part with a 150 W TDP, eight-channel memory, ECC support, and 64 PCIe Gen 4 lanes. It is built for sustained multi-threaded throughput in dense compute environments, not for battery-operated devices.

In single-threaded tests, the Xeon Gold 5317 wins by 78.8% in Cinebench R15 and R20, and by 78.7% in R23. That consistency is noteworthy: despite the Core i3's higher boost clock (4.10 GHz versus 3.60 GHz), the Xeon Gold's newer Ice Lake architecture and larger L3 cache (18 MB shared versus 6 MB shared) deliver superior per-thread performance. The Core i3's 2.20 GHz base clock and 4.10 GHz boost clock do not compensate for the architectural and cache advantages.

In multi-threaded tests, the Xeon Gold's 12 cores and 24 threads overwhelm the Core i3's 2 cores and 4 threads. The multi-core margins are also 78.7% in all three Cinebench versions. The Xeon Gold's 18 MB shared L3 cache and eight-channel memory bandwidth (187.7 GB/s) further separate it in workloads that scale with memory throughput.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon Gold 5317 is the superior processor in every recorded benchmark. If the question is which CPU delivers higher raw performance, the answer is the Xeon Gold 5317, and the margin is roughly four to five times the Core i3's scores across all tested workloads. The 78.7% to 78.8% deltas are nearly uniform, indicating that the Xeon Gold's advantage is structural, not workload-specific.

Who should pick the Core i3-1115G4? Only those constrained by the mobile form factor. The Core i3 is the only one of the two with integrated graphics, and its 15 W TDP makes it suitable for fanless or low-power designs. It supports DDR4 and LPDDR4X memory in a dual-channel configuration, which is typical for ultraportables. Its launch MSRP is $281. The Xeon Gold 5317 has no recorded launch MSRP. The Core i3's 63rd percentile among all CPUs suggests it is not a weak processor in the broader market; it is simply outclassed by a 12-core server chip.

Who should pick the Xeon Gold 5317? Anyone needing multi-threaded throughput, ECC memory, or high memory bandwidth. The Xeon Gold's 12 cores, 24 threads, 18 MB shared L3, and 187.7 GB/s memory bandwidth make it a workstation or server staple. Its 64 PCIe Gen 4 lanes support high-speed peripherals and accelerators. The 150 W TDP is a non-issue in a server chassis but disqualifies it for mobile use.

There is no scenario where the Core i3 wins on raw performance. The only rational reason to choose it is the mobile form factor, integrated graphics, or power budget. The Xeon Gold 5317 wins every head-to-head test and every architectural comparison that matters for compute density.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon Gold 5317 scores 2338 against the Core i3's 497, a delta of -78.7% from the Core i3's perspective. In R15 single-core, the Xeon Gold scores 330 against 70, a delta of -78.8%. The same pattern repeats in R20: multi-core 9743 versus 2071 (-78.7%), single-core 1375 versus 292 (-78.8%). R23 shows 23199 versus 4933 (-78.7%) for multi-core and 3275 versus 696 (-78.7%) for single-core.

The single-threaded margin is particularly telling. The Core i3's boost clock of 4.10 GHz is higher than the Xeon Gold's 3.60 GHz, yet the Xeon Gold still wins single-core by nearly 79%. This indicates that the Xeon Gold's Ice Lake architecture delivers more instructions per clock, or that the 18 MB shared L3 cache reduces memory latency enough to overcome the clock deficit. The Core i3's L1 cache is 80 KB per core versus the Xeon Gold's 64 KB per core, but the Xeon Gold's larger L3 (18 MB versus 6 MB) appears to matter more.

The multi-threaded margin is expected given the core count difference: 12 cores versus 2 cores, 24 threads versus 4 threads. The Xeon Gold's 150 W TDP enables sustained multi-threaded loads without thermal throttling, whereas the Core i3's 15 W TDP is designed for bursty mobile workloads. The Xeon Gold also has an eight-channel memory bus with 187.7 GB/s bandwidth, which feeds multi-threaded workloads far more effectively than the Core i3's dual-channel DDR4/LPDDR4X support.

The database also records PassMark scores for the Core i3 only. Its PassMark single-thread score is 2585, multi-thread 5915, integer math 17472, floating point math 10791, and data encryption 3339. These numbers place the Core i3 at the 63rd percentile among all CPUs. The Xeon Gold's percentile is 62nd, but that is based on a different benchmark distribution, as it has no PassMark entries in this database. The average benchmark scores (6851 for the Core i3, 6710 for the Xeon Gold) reflect different test sets and should not be read as a direct comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Xeon Gold 5317 wins all three Cinebench single-core tests by 78.8% (R15 and R20) or 78.7% (R23). Scores are 330 versus 70 in R15, 1375 versus 292 in R20, and 3275 versus 696 in R23.

Q: How many cores and threads does each CPU have?

A: The Intel Core i3-1115G4 has 2 cores and 4 threads. The Intel Xeon Gold 5317 has 12 cores and 24 threads.

Q: Does the Core i3-1115G4 have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it has Iris Xe-LP Graphics G4. The Xeon Gold 5317 has no integrated graphics.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Intel Xeon Gold 5317 supports ECC memory. The Core i3-1115G4 does not.

Q: What memory bandwidth does the Xeon Gold 5317 provide?

A: The Xeon Gold 5317 has an eight-channel memory bus with 187.7 GB/s bandwidth, supporting DDR4. The Core i3 has a dual-channel bus supporting DDR4 and LPDDR4X.

Q: Are the benchmark deltas consistent across all tests?

A: Yes, the Xeon Gold 5317 wins every head-to-head test by either 78.7% or 78.8%. There are no tests where the Core i3 wins.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel families and target different markets. The Core i3-1115G4 is a Tiger Lake-U mobile part built on the Willow Cove-U core architecture, with a 10 nm process node and a die size of 144 mm². It uses the Intel BGA 1449 socket and has a 15 W TDP. The Xeon Gold 5317 is an Ice Lake-SP server part built on the Ice Lake-SP core architecture, also on a 10 nm process node, but with no recorded die size. It uses the Intel Socket 4189 and has a 150 W TDP.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The Core i3 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Xeon Gold has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. While the Core i3 has more L1 and L2 per core, the Xeon Gold's much larger shared L3 cache benefits multi-threaded workloads and memory-bound tasks.

Memory support is another major divergence. The Core i3 supports DDR4 and LPDDR4X in a dual-channel configuration, with no ECC support. The Xeon Gold supports DDR4 in an eight-channel configuration with 187.7 GB/s bandwidth and ECC enabled. The eight-channel bus provides roughly four times the memory channels of the Core i3, which is critical for server workloads that stream large datasets.

PCIe capabilities also differ. The Core i3 provides Gen 4 with 4 lanes (CPU only), while the Xeon Gold provides Gen 4 with 64 lanes (CPU only). That 16-fold difference in lane count allows the Xeon Gold to connect to many high-bandwidth devices, such as GPUs, NVMe storage, and network controllers.

Clocks: the Core i3 has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and boost clock of 4.10 GHz. The Xeon Gold has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and boost clock of 3.60 GHz. The Core i3 boosts higher, but the Xeon Gold's higher base clock and superior architecture win the single-threaded tests anyway.

The Core i3 was released on 2020-09-01, while the Xeon Gold was released on 2021-04-05. Both are listed as Active in production. The Core i3's part number is SRK08; the Xeon Gold has no recorded part number. The Core i3 has a launch MSRP of $281; the Xeon Gold has no launch MSRP recorded. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The Xeon Gold's market segment is Server/Workstation, while the Core i3's is Mobile. That distinction explains every architectural choice: the Core i3 prioritizes low power and integrated graphics for laptops, while the Xeon Gold prioritizes core count, memory bandwidth, ECC, and PCIe lanes for compute density. The benchmark results confirm that the Xeon Gold's architecture delivers roughly 78.7% to 78.8% more performance in every recorded test.